24-April 2023 : LAB 44% / CON 29% / LDEM 11% / GRN 5%

[Mr Poppy]

Jul 5, 2023 8:19:10 GMT athena said:

For those who prefer not to rely on the Labour party's presentation of its own proposal the
Institute for Government provides a helpful analysis.

It may be a minority opinion, but I regard the Blair-Brown government's last attempt at devolution as a dreadful botch. It failed all the English regions that are ill-served by govt from the SE, largely in the interests of the SE, and created unecessary legislative and administrative complexity. I've always thought it was inherently unstable and left far too many hostages to fortune.

The Tory-led govts that have followed took advantage, adding to the unecessary complexity with its patchwork of mayoralties, all with slightly different powers, all still supplicants to the Westminster govt. The mayoralties cover only a fraction of England, by population and by area, and they're all urban.

Now Lab proposes to continue the same approach. And that's if you're inclined to trust that Starmer would be a decentralising PM, which on my reading of the straws in the wind that seems unlikely.

I want a British Federation (NI would be welcome if it wants to be included), with England split up into states that have the same powers as the Scottish and Welsh states (as far as possible - Scotland would be likely to continue to be somewhat anomalous for some time, with its separate legal system), each with its own state premier and state parliament/assembly. We'd probably want a 'territory' category for areas that wouldn't sit comfortably in their local state (maybe some of the Scottish islands; London).* The states would all elect representatives to a federal parliament that would handle federal matters. I'd favour an updated version of the Barnett formula for deciding the allocation of federal funding to the states (avoids the federal government favouring states with an administration of the same political hue).

It's hard to see how to implement this kind of constitutional reform without moving to a codified constitution, which is one reason it won't happen, but I wish our main political parties would grasp that particular nettle.

*The eage-eyed will note that I've borrowed Australian terminology. This is simply because it's the federal system I know best, but I can't resist pointing out that Australia, with a population of c.26 million is split into 6 states, plus two territories that have quite similar powers.

I'm not sure if there is specific polling along the lines of the 'in hindsight' polling we continue to see for Brexit but I would agree that the Blair-Brown devolution was a "dreadful botch" (and the CON HMG added layers of "unnecessary complexity" were... unnecessary)

I'm fairly familiar with the Canadian system of 10 provinces + 3 territories that seems to work well for them (now that the Quebec issue has been resolved via 'Clarity Acts'). You still get the 'blame game' of provinces blaming federal and moaning about inter province transfers (eg Alberta 'forgetting' it was bailed out in the Oil crisis now that they make loads-a-money out of O&G revenues) but each province/territory has a lot of devolved powers and operate quite different approaches on taxation and other issues.

UK is quite different in that one polity dominates the others in population and hence powers in the 'federal' parliament (but that is also due to UK having a lot of NAT MPs coming into HoC from the devolved nations - or abstaining in the case of SF). Yes, we could look to break England up into regions but in the N.East regional assembly ref of 2004 then 'No' won by 78% to 22% and surely that would simply add to the "unnecessary complexity" and possibly repeat the mistake of the "dreadful botch" of Blair-Brown devolution?

Final point. We do have some polling on important issues and outside of Scotland then very few people care about the 'Union/Indy - devolution' issue (eg it's last place in R&W's Most Important Issues*, below even Covid)

Of course if Starmer wants to fill a load of HoC time with something few people care about then that is his choice if/when he becomes PM but Scotland is starting to use it's 'tax+spend' powers more extensively and SNP's dominance of Scottish politics is perhaps ending. Maybe give the current system a wee bit longer and use 'Clarity Acts' to lock that in. The current system is far from ideal (and Barnett formula is certainly due an overhaul) but would anything else be better? We can't turn back time and undo what Blair-Brown-Cameron-etc have done and whilst it's failing then IMO it ain't totally broken (unlike some more important stuff like NHS, Economy, Immigration) and if ain't broken then don't waste time trying to fix it (IMO).

* redfieldandwiltonstrategies.com/latest-gb-voting-intention-2-july-2023/

[leftieliberal]

Up to today I had no idea who Mozammel Hossain was (apart from being the other remaining candidate in the Tory London Mayoral selection). Here is a piece about him in the Guardian: www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/jul/05/how-ultimate-outsider-mozammel-hossain-could-become-tory-choice-for-london-mayor
As someone who has risen from being born in a tin-roofed house in Bangladesh to become the first Bangladeshi-born criminal barrister Queen or King’s Counsel, and knowing what the other candidate, Susan Hall, is like, I wish him well. If the Tories do win against the odds we will at least have someone who seems competent in City Hall. The Lib Dems haven't selected their mayoral candidate yet, but they will get my vote whoever they are (and as the election is now FPTP, I don't have to think about how to use my second vote).

[graham]

Jul 5, 2023 9:12:29 GMT steve said:

shevii
You could except the Labour vote went down the lib dems vote went up.
You could more accurately say too many people voted Labour to keep the Tories out.

No - had voters here not switched from Labour to LDs the Tories would not have won.

[pjw1961]

Jul 5, 2023 9:04:52 GMT colin said:

Jul 4, 2023 20:50:35 GMT pjw1961 said:

I'm not at all relaxed about life expectancy. I would like to see radical government action against the food manufacturing and retailing industries who place profit above people's health. 

As to the NHS, I'm afraid we are all wise to the Tory trick of massively under-funding it for years and then claiming it has failed so that it can be flogged off for profit. Away with you, sir. 

If you think the way to lift life expectancy in this country to the level of other countries , is state interventions in the food industry  then I'm not surprised that you think Switzerland, Iceland, Norway , Japan, Australia & Sweden  are mediterranean countries.

The 75 years of the NHS's existence   has seen over 65's in this country double as a % of the population.( and rising). It cannot cope now with the demands on it. If you had an open enough mind to read the reports from Kings Fund & OECD  which I referred to you would see that overcapacity , diversity of provision and less restrictive gateways are a feature of systems providing good health outcomes. And , yes, as are mandatory and optional health insurance funding components. 

It is to be hoped that Streeting-our next Health Secretary,  understands that money  alone is not the answer to NHS's plight .

Sorry if I've disrupted yours and Trevor's happy little right-wing consensus to use the under-funding of the NHS as an excuse to change the model to advantage the wealthy. Worth considering what the Kings Fund, Nuffield Trust and Health Foundation said today:

"The NHS has endured a decade of under-investment compared to the historic average, and capital spending has been well below comparable countries. As a result, the health service has insufficient resources to do its job: fewer hospital beds than almost all similar countries, outdated equipment, dilapidated buildings and failing IT."

Remind me who was responsible for that, oh yes, the Tories. And making my point about wider public health:

"Long-term political action is also needed to address the fraying health of the UK population. The NHS was not set up to go it alone. Protecting and improving people’s health depends on a wider system of services and support that includes local government and social security. Yet people are falling between the cracks of public services and the NHS is often left to pick up the pieces"

The NHS has never been resistant to change, new methods or new technology. What it needs less of is interfering politicians with stupid plans - and that includes the dismal Streeting, my least favorite Labour politician. 

And yes I would have state intervention in the food industry just as we have had in the similarly poisonous tobacco industry - and many of the firms in the food industry want it too. They are willing to clean up their act and stop making their customers ill but they want protection from being undercut by unscrupulous competitors continuing to stuff food with cheap, un-nutritious gunk.     

www.health.org.uk/news-and-comment/news/joint-letter-to-political-leaders-in-england-on-future-of-nhs

 

[steve]

In my occasional series of 1970's awesome music I bring you:

Attachment Deleted

[steve]

graham

Derrr!
If more had the lib dems would have!

[Mr Poppy]

Jul 5, 2023 9:04:52 GMT colin said:

Jul 4, 2023 20:50:35 GMT pjw1961 said:

I'm not at all relaxed about life expectancy. I would like to see radical government action against the food manufacturing and retailing industries who place profit above people's health. 

As to the NHS, I'm afraid we are all wise to the Tory trick of massively under-funding it for years and then claiming it has failed so that it can be flogged off for profit. Away with you, sir. 

If you think the way to lift life expectancy in this country to the level of other countries , is state interventions in the food industry  then I'm not surprised that you think Switzerland, Iceland, Norway , Japan, Australia & Sweden  are mediterranean countries.

The 75 years of the NHS's existence   has seen over 65's in this country double as a % of the population.( and rising). It cannot cope now with the demands on it. If you had an open enough mind to read the reports from Kings Fund & OECD  which I referred to you would see that overcapacity , diversity of provision and less restrictive gateways are a feature of systems providing good health outcomes. And , yes, as are mandatory and optional health insurance funding components. 

It is to be hoped that Streeting-our next Health Secretary,  understands that money  alone is not the answer to NHS's plight .

To make the NHS work better for poorer people then it's simples - take the rich out of the 'free' queue and make then pay for their healthcare.

Between Reeves and Streeting then I hope they work it out. CON's approach of throwing more money into the money pit is a 'sticking plaster' and Reeves doesn't seem keen on 'tax+spend' which only leaves 'rightsizing' the NHS (ideally by making rich people pay for their own healthcare so that there are less people in the 'free' queue)

Another issue is the people who use the 'welfare state' as a trampoline rather than a safety net. Some people 'choose' to be obese, get into drunk fights at weekends, OD on drugs, etc and as mentioned many times then 'bad choices' should have consequences for the individual not all taxpayers. Various 'carrots+sticks' that we could use to deter/prevent 'bad choices' and that would also reduce demand in the 'free' queue. 

 

[Deleted]

Jul 5, 2023 0:02:57 GMT @isa said:

A shocking insight into the parlous state of the UK's armed forces' preparedness and capability. We'd currently be hard pressed to repel a major incursion from the Isle of Wight, let alone Russia.


www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12264611/Britain-just-40-tanks-dozen-frigates-destroyers-ready-war.html

Let’s nuke them before they get any ideas.

[Deleted]

Jul 5, 2023 6:48:40 GMT alurqa said:

Jul 4, 2023 21:12:17 GMT @fecklessmiser said:

Apologies for multiple posts. I should be practising Bach’s Ciaccona but am trying to emulate ole Danny instead. Did anyone else know that J. S. Bach wrote the first draft of Partita no. 2 in D minor, BWV 1004 when he was holidaying in Hastings in 1722 by the way?

He'd be 37 by then, so would probably have 15 to 20 kids in tow. What a holiday!

He never brought his kids. Spent the day paddling (and humming) then wrote bits of the Chaconne after supper.

[Mr Poppy]

Does anyone think Boris should get a free drug on the NHS or get some "tough love" and be told (by himself, wife, friends, 'private GP') to stop raiding the fridge for cheddar at 11:30pm and do more exercise?

BORIS JOHNSON: The wonder drug I hoped would stop my 11.30pm fridge raids for cheddar and chorizo didn’t work for me. But I still believe it could change the lives of millions
www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12203407/BORIS-JOHNSON-Wonder-drug-hoped-stop-raids-cheddar-chorizo-didnt-work-me.html?

Stuff like sugar is massively addictive (hence 'sin taxes' on sugar that could+should be extended). For the vast majority of fat people it simply takes a bit of will power to lose weight - not a f*-ing drug.

Drug companies love the NHS. Taxpayers throw money into the money pit and drug companies haul that money out (and happily kick a bit back to GPs and MPs, or ex-PMs perhaps?) 

NB I'm fully aware there are some genuine medical conditions that cause obesity and obviously those should be treated (by NHS if you can't afford private), but for a fat, lazy, rich person like Boris then 'just say NO' (and if he can't say no to raiding the fridge for fatty foods at 11:30pm then taxpayers should say NO to him getting anything for free on the NHS). 

[crossbat11]

Jul 5, 2023 9:06:16 GMT Rafwan said:

Jul 5, 2023 7:53:45 GMT crossbat11 said:

pjw1961

While there may be some partisan disappointment in that local council by-election result, if it was due to a purely parochial issue like the imposition of a congestion charge then I'd say it's an encouraging sign of local politics working well. The Tory candidate ran on opposing the charge and won, albeit with the great assistance of FPTP. But he won and, in a contorted sense, the local people have spoken and sent their message to the council. Democracy in imperfect action.

More proof to me why it is faintly ridiculous to extrapolate anything of any national political and electoral significance from local council by election results.

So two-thirds of voters want a congestion charge and one-third don’t, and the ‘don’t’ group ‘wins’ the representative? That brings a whole new meaning to “imperfect”.

And sorry, PJ, don’t see what there is to ‘agree’ with at all. Nor do I understand why ‘national’ politics will somehow be invulnerable to such aberration.

You'll have to translate your last paragraph, I'm afraid. I've read it a number of times and, quite simply, don't really understand a word of it .

[neilj]

This is what the next election will be decided on

[Deleted]

Jul 5, 2023 9:38:48 GMT pjw1961 said:

Jul 5, 2023 9:04:52 GMT colin said:

Sorry if I've disrupted yours and Trevor's happy little right-wing consensus to use the under-funding of the NHS as an excuse to change the model to advantage the wealthy. Worth considering what the Kings Fund, Nuffield Trust and Health Foundation said today:

"The NHS has endured a decade of under-investment compared to the historic average, and capital spending has been well below comparable countries. As a result, the health service has insufficient resources to do its job: fewer hospital beds than almost all similar countries, outdated equipment, dilapidated buildings and failing IT."

Remind me who was responsible for that, oh yes, the Tories. And making my point about wider public health:

"Long-term political action is also needed to address the fraying health of the UK population. The NHS was not set up to go it alone. Protecting and improving people’s health depends on a wider system of services and support that includes local government and social security. Yet people are falling between the cracks of public services and the NHS is often left to pick up the pieces"

The NHS has never been resistant to change, new methods or new technology. What it needs less of is interfering politicians with stupid plans - and that includes the dismal Streeting, my least favorite Labour politician. 

And yes I would have state intervention in the food industry just as we have had in the similarly poisonous tobacco industry - and many of the firms in the food industry want it too. They are willing to clean up their act and stop making their customers ill but they want protection from being undercut by unscrupulous competitors continuing to stuff food with cheap, un-nutritious gunk.     

www.health.org.uk/news-and-comment/news/joint-letter-to-political-leaders-in-england-on-future-of-nhs

 

Yes I read the KF/NT/THO letter to the political parties. It asks them to move away from " quick fixes " and provide " the investment and reform needed to preserve the NHS for future generations"

Why is Streeting dismal in your view ?

[Deleted]

Jul 5, 2023 9:48:09 GMT Mr Poppy said:

Jul 5, 2023 9:04:52 GMT colin said:

To make the NHS work better for poorer people then it's simples - take the rich out of the 'free' queue and make then pay for their healthcare.

Between Reeves and Streeting then I hope they work it out. CON's approach of throwing more money into the money pit is a 'sticking plaster' and Reeves doesn't seem keen on 'tax+spend' which only leaves 'rightsizing' the NHS (ideally by making rich people pay for their own healthcare so that there are less people in the 'free' queue)

Another issue is the people who use the 'welfare state' as a trampoline rather than a safety net. Some people 'choose' to be obese, get into drunk fights at weekends, OD on drugs, etc and as mentioned many times then 'bad choices' should have consequences for the individual not all taxpayers. Various 'carrots+sticks' that we could use to deter/prevent 'bad choices' and that would also reduce demand in the 'free' queue. 

 

According to OECD we are third highest on total funding as % GDP

But we drop out of the top three on funding per capita. Top three there is Germany/Switz/Norway. We can discount the last two as their GDP per capita is nearly double ours and Germany for obvious reasons.

So we do need to grow the pc gdp and maintain % NHS funding. But when you look at the health outcomes of Germany and others and their Health system architecture and funding models you see the differences.

They have no fear of diverse provision to produce overcapacity-there is no gatekeeping system in some of those countries ! And no fear either of co-payment via mandatory and/or private insurance. We are going to pay more anyway-why does it have to be via direct taxation all the time?

Whilst there is this religious clinging to inputs rather than outputs , and worrying about who provides the care rather than the quality of that care  NHS will continue to be a fiscal black hole.

It always surprises me that there is not more liking for effective Regulation on loc, rather than Control . Effective Regulation of key services-be it water or healthcare -unlocks diversity of provision with all its benefits. But the Regulators have to be tough and effective.

[hireton]

Jul 5, 2023 7:43:43 GMT crossbat11 said:

Jul 5, 2023 7:10:25 GMT hireton said:

oldnat

Re 16 in the Labour Party document, it is difficult to see how a convention which has been completely ignored on all important issues in recent years can even be said to exist let alone be enhanced especially one which the courts have said is not justiciable despite being referenced in the Scotland Act.

The Brown Report contained an elaborate set of proposals on councils, committees etc regarding devolution. However, on the central issue of protecting devolution through the new second chamber its proposals on the role, composition and powers of the second chamber were vague and in so far as they were specific they retained the legislative supremacy of the House of Commons still elected by FPTP.

It's smoke and mirrors for the gullible.

The current opinion polls suggest that there may be more "gullible" voters in Scotland than you'd like to think. There are obviously more pressing reasons for the evaporation of the once gargantuan and long-standing SNP poll leads than Labour's devolution proposals, not least the growing realisation amongst voters of SNP misgovernment and internal party factional strife, but OldNat's and your desperate foraging through the undergrowth of Labour's proposals to try and find holes to pick, suggests to me that Mr Sarwar and his team are spooking the once complacent and somewhat arrogant SNP. Sarwar appears to be quite an able demolisher of SNP bull and bluster.

I think this genuine threat to continuous SNP hegemony in Scotland is an entirely good thing for British politics and long overdue.

[b

Lol poor old Batty is having one of his British nationalist hissy sissy fits again.

The only substantive part of the Brown Report on UK devolution is the replacement of the House of Lords by an Assembly of the Nations and Regions (the rest is simply machinery of government changes involving councils, committees, joint councils and nearly every other form of bureaucracy which have been happening to no effect every few years).

The report contains an outline of the Assembly's powers but does not give any specific proposals (even for consultation) on its composition,size or method of election ( and it seems to envisage a hybrid Assembly of directly elected members, indirectly elected members and government appointees).

It proposes that the Assembly will have weaker powers compared to the HoL in that it will not be able to delay legislation generally but will have a role in "entrenching" the devolution settlement by being able to reject legislation by the HoC on certain constitutional matters (subject to the Supreme Court agreeing that such matters are at issue) while at the same time maintaining by some means the primacy of the unreformed House of Commons in the event of a disagreement.

And of course it would not protect the constitutional settlement if it agreed with the HoC even if the devolved parliaments/assemblies disagreed as Westminster would still reign supreme.

I posted this article at the time of the Brown Report which looks at the massive gaps in the superstructure of the Brown Report:

ukconstitutionallaw.org/2022/12/08/aileen-mcharg-the-future-of-the-territorial-constitution-under-labour-the-report-of-the-commission-on-the-uks-future/

[steve]

There are few decent jokes told in parliament but a zinger in pmq's


Maria Black is retiring from parliament at the next election she said she and Dowden joined the Commons at the same time, “and I’m pretty sure we will be leaving at the same time”. She added!


youtu.be/XyEHTS_-M28

[neilj]

Re NHS, lots of talk about alternative funding models, but not much in the way of specifics

Obviously I'm talking about England as the RUK will have different systems

If they are talking about an extra insurance will there be exemptions
If so one imagines it will be in line with prescriptions for England. Worth remembering 90% are free due to exemptions
So if we have similar exemptions then we will be introducing a whole new layer of bureaucracy and charges which the people who use the NHS 90% of the time won't pay

Or are we talking about paying a fee to use it each time, if so again I would assume similar exemptions to prescriptions

The other thing about prescriptions, for the relatively small number who pay it, initially it was a modest charge, but it has risen way above inflation.When prescription charges were re introduced in 1968 they were 12 pence
If it went up with inflation it would be £1.74. In reality it is now £9.65

[pjw1961]

Jul 5, 2023 11:51:25 GMT colin said:

Jul 5, 2023 9:38:48 GMT pjw1961 said:

Sorry if I've disrupted yours and Trevor's happy little right-wing consensus to use the under-funding of the NHS as an excuse to change the model to advantage the wealthy. Worth considering what the Kings Fund, Nuffield Trust and Health Foundation said today:

"The NHS has endured a decade of under-investment compared to the historic average, and capital spending has been well below comparable countries. As a result, the health service has insufficient resources to do its job: fewer hospital beds than almost all similar countries, outdated equipment, dilapidated buildings and failing IT."

Remind me who was responsible for that, oh yes, the Tories. And making my point about wider public health:

"Long-term political action is also needed to address the fraying health of the UK population. The NHS was not set up to go it alone. Protecting and improving people’s health depends on a wider system of services and support that includes local government and social security. Yet people are falling between the cracks of public services and the NHS is often left to pick up the pieces"

The NHS has never been resistant to change, new methods or new technology. What it needs less of is interfering politicians with stupid plans - and that includes the dismal Streeting, my least favorite Labour politician. 

And yes I would have state intervention in the food industry just as we have had in the similarly poisonous tobacco industry - and many of the firms in the food industry want it too. They are willing to clean up their act and stop making their customers ill but they want protection from being undercut by unscrupulous competitors continuing to stuff food with cheap, un-nutritious gunk.     

www.health.org.uk/news-and-comment/news/joint-letter-to-political-leaders-in-england-on-future-of-nhs

 

Yes I read the KF/NT/THO letter to the political parties. It asks them to move away from " quick fixes " and provide " the investment and reform needed to preserve the NHS for future generations"

Why is Streeting dismal in your view ?

I also want reform, transformation and improvement and support the message of the letter, but I suspect you and I mean something different by reform. Mine does not not involve any move away from a (largely) tax funded service (mainly) free at the point of delivery and the other core principles of the NHS as set out in the NHS Constitution for England. Nor, from my reading, are the three health think tanks calling for that given the stress they put on public support for the NHS model. 

As to Streeting, part of my dislike relates to internal Labour politics - he is a right wing factionalist, who during the Corbyn period publicly attacked the party and tried to damage its chances of electoral success. That never sits well with me, wherever it comes from. Specifically on his Health brief it dates back to the speech he gave to the King's Fund in 2022. While his core message - to move the emphasis from expensive acute care in hospitals and 'fixing sick people', toward more money for primary care and keeping people well in the first place - is one I 100% agree with, there were other features that alarmed me. 

One was the 'no more money, only reform' part - entirely unrealistic after over a decade of real terms cuts - but actually it was a couple of his specific proposals that seemed alarmingly ill-thought through and made me conclude here was another politician (see Andrew Lansley) with big but dumb ideas, which shows that he is not talking to the people who actually understand how to improve the system. To give one example, Streeting proposed people being able to self-refer into certain services without going through their GP. This would be a disaster if implemented, overwhelming scarce services with masses of 'worried well' and people not entitled to treatment. Further, self-referral wouldn't result in people being seen, it would result in everyone sitting in longer waiting lists to be seen - including the poor devils who actually need the service. Dumb, dumb, dumb. 

The point is that the NHS knows how to fix its problems and has done for years. Simon Stevens had the whole thing worked out until Johnson sacked him for being too independently minded. What it lacks is the cash (i.e. money for change, rather than for crisis management) and the permission to do it. The best thing Streeting could do is bin his own ideas and implement Stevens' plans.


 

[pjw1961]

Jul 5, 2023 12:19:00 GMT neilj said:

Re NHS, lots of talk about alternative funding models, but not much in the way of specifics

Obviously I'm talking about England as the RUK will have different systems

If they are talking about an extra insurance will there be exemptions
If so one imagines it will be in line with prescriptions for England. Worth remembering 90% are free due to exemptions
So if we have similar exemptions then we will be introducing a whole new layer of bureaucracy and charges which the people who use the NHS 90% of the time won't pay

Or are we talking about paying a fee to use it each time, if so again I would assume similar exemptions to prescriptions

The other thing about prescriptions, for the relatively small number who pay it, initially it was a modest charge, but it has risen way above inflation.When prescription charges were re introduced in 1968 they were 12 pence
If it went up with inflation it would be £1.74. In reality it is now £9.65

The inevitable result of an insurance based system will be a two tier service (those paying will expect something extra for their money) and the equally inevitable result of a two tier service in a UK setting is that the 'free' part will decline in quality and quantity over time, probably ending up propped up by charity - a medical equivalent of food banks - to the extent it exists at all. The poor will return to the pre-NHS position of minimising their health care and living with ill health. It is a proposal dressed up to look attractive but in reality deeply cynical, immoral and ultimately vile. 

[Deleted]

hireton “ Lol poor old Batty is having one of his British nationalist hissy sissy fits again.”

Gosh Batty, that is no laughing matter at all and I’m very sorry to hear the news. Have you considered a Scottish doctor to sort this oot?

Let me know when I can visit to condole.

[neilj]

In fairness Truss would have been lower if that lettuce hadn't beaten her

[Deleted]

neilj I don’t think it is right to trivialise the lettuce with comparisons to Ms Truss.

FM

[leftieliberal]

I see that the Just Stop Oil protestors at Wimbledon have switched from orange paint to orange confetti. Perhaps it's finally got through their thick middle-class skulls that damaging grass in a protest against climate change is not ecologically sound. For some reason they also targeted last Saturday's Pride procession in London, although what they have against Coca-Cola is beyond me.

[Deleted]

Just the sixteen mass shootings across America to celebrate Independence Day. They certainly know how to have a good time don’t they?

[Danny]

Jul 5, 2023 9:06:16 GMT Rafwan said:

So two-thirds of voters want a congestion charge and one-third don’t, and the ‘don’t’ group ‘wins’ the representative? That brings a whole new meaning to “imperfect”.

Somewhat reminiscent of the referendum result. 1/3 for membership. 1/3 against membership. 1/3 didnt vote. And yet we left.

[Danny]

Jul 5, 2023 9:12:29 GMT steve said:

shevii
You could except the Labour vote went down the lib dems vote went up.
You could more accurately say too many people voted Labour to keep the Tories out.

It might be some voters would only choose either con or lib, and never lab. If you tell them not to vote lib, then instead they vote con, and that means labour has an even bigger target to reach.

So be careful in trying to persuade people not to vote for the third candidate, it might not benefit the second candidate.

[Danny]

Jul 5, 2023 10:16:31 GMT @fecklessmiser said:

Jul 5, 2023 0:02:57 GMT @isa said:

A shocking insight into the parlous state of the UK's armed forces' preparedness and capability. We'd currently be hard pressed to repel a major incursion from the Isle of Wight, let alone Russia.


www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12264611/Britain-just-40-tanks-dozen-frigates-destroyers-ready-war.html

Let’s nuke them before they get any ideas.

All the money was spent on aircraft carriers. They are really great to stop a Russian tank invasion.

[Danny]

Jul 5, 2023 10:29:30 GMT Mr Poppy said:

Stuff like sugar is massively addictive (hence 'sin taxes' on sugar that could+should be extended). For the vast majority of fat people it simply takes a bit of will power to lose weight - not a f*-ing drug.

Funnily enough that doesnt work with something else which is very addictive, which is gambling. The financial penalty is immediate, but people just keep doing it.

NB I'm fully aware there are some genuine medical conditions that cause obesity and obviously those should be treated (by NHS if you can't afford private), but for a fat, lazy, rich person like Boris then 'just say NO' (and if he can't say no to raiding the fridge for fatty foods at 11:30pm then taxpayers should say NO to him getting anything for free on the NHS). 

The problem is processed foods. Its not sugar per se, its the way it is made up into food which people find very tasty. A rather better strategy is to reformulate foods than to hike the prices. Or maybe put sugar on ration again?

Incidentally, modern thinking seems to be that while exercise will make you more healthy, it will not help you lose weight.

[Deleted]

Jul 5, 2023 12:41:01 GMT pjw1961 said:

Jul 5, 2023 11:51:25 GMT colin said:

Yes I read the KF/NT/THO letter to the political parties. It asks them to move away from " quick fixes " and provide " the investment and reform needed to preserve the NHS for future generations"

Why is Streeting dismal in your view ?

I also want reform, transformation and improvement and support the message of the letter, but I suspect you and I mean something different by reform. Mine does not not involve any move away from a (largely) tax funded service (mainly) free at the point of delivery and the other core principles of the NHS as set out in the NHS Constitution for England. Nor, from my reading, are the three health think tanks calling for that given the stress they put on public support for the NHS model. 

As to Streeting, part of my dislike relates to internal Labour politics - he is a right wing factionalist, who during the Corbyn period publicly attacked the party and tried to damage its chances of electoral success. That never sits well with me, wherever it comes from. Specifically on his Health brief it dates back to the speech he gave to the King's Fund in 2022. While his core message - to move the emphasis from expensive acute care in hospitals and 'fixing sick people', toward more money for primary care and keeping people well in the first place - is one I 100% agree with, there were other features that alarmed me. 

One was the 'no more money, only reform' part - entirely unrealistic after over a decade of real terms cuts - but actually it was a couple of his specific proposals that seemed alarmingly ill-thought through and made me conclude here was another politician (see Andrew Lansley) with big but dumb ideas, which shows that he is not talking to the people who actually understand how to improve the system. To give one example, Streeting proposed people being able to self-refer into certain services without going through their GP. This would be a disaster if implemented, overwhelming scarce services with masses of 'worried well' and people not entitled to treatment. Further, self-referral wouldn't result in people being seen, it would result in everyone sitting in longer waiting lists to be seen - including the poor devils who actually need the service. Dumb, dumb, dumb. 

The point is that the NHS knows how to fix its problems and has done for years. Simon Stevens had the whole thing worked out until Johnson sacked him for being too independently minded. What it lacks is the cash (i.e. money for change, rather than for crisis management) and the permission to do it. The best thing Streeting could do is bin his own ideas and implement Stevens' plans.


 

I think you can rest easy. I was reading that to switch NHS to a continental style system would take two decades at least. As we both know, no English politician is going to propose such a heresy to  insular voters  brainwashed into believing that the NHS is the best there is to keep them well .

Thanks for your notes on Streeting. He is obviously to the right of your good self-which is OK by me .

Yes budding ( and acting !) Health Secretaries open their mouths too often before understanding their task. But that in itself is a sign for me that the thing is too big to be managed in this narrow top down way. Its a joke really.


I expect Streeting will do his best-and like all his predecessors end up with a desk covered in sticking plaster. 

[Danny]

Jul 5, 2023 12:04:36 GMT colin said:

We are going to pay more anyway-why does it have to be via direct taxation all the time?

Because if its determined by personal wealth, then the rich get a first class sercvice, the middle a second class service and the poor a third class service. Maybe you think that would be fair, maybe you don't?