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

[Mr Poppy]

Follow up to the Ed Balls "gotcha" on Sir Ed Davey

The section Ed Balls picked states:

"Internationalism
We support a fairer and more equal, tolerant and connected world and collaboration with the UK's neighbours - including, ultimately, rejoining the EU..."
www.libdems.org.uk/values

So LDEM policy is specific about the "end point" but vague on timing

Elsewhere on their website then Sir Ed was focussing on the 4point plan (and we all know the magic number is '5' so perhaps "ultimately rejoining the EU" was #5??). Anyway, the 4pts are a mix of things Rishi-CON are doing (eg rejoin Horizon*, if the terms are acceptable) and the kind of vague wishful thinking cakeism of Starmer-LAB's "Make Brexit (and immigration) Work" (eg a returns agreement) but #4 clearly states:

"Once..(Entente achieves as much as Entente can).. seeking to join the Single Market"
(paraphrased the cakeism) 
www.libdems.org.uk/news/article/rebuilding-trade-cooperation-with-europe

Whilst again vague on timing it is again worth noting that Dublin III has collapsed within EU (not that Cooper (LAB) seems to realise). So in the "Real World" is there any significant difference in policy between Rishi-CON, Starmer-LAB and Davey-LDEM with regards to relationships with EU in at least the short-term?

The longer we stay out of the SM (or full-fat EU) then the more adjustment businesses will make to the "new normal" so IMO it seems that LDEMs are trying to put the cart before a horse that all three main GB wide parties have put out to pasture. 

NB I most certainly don't want UK to join SM, CU or Rejoin EU but I'm not opposed to further "mini deals" on minor stuff like visas, reducing some NTBs, UK-NW.Europe collaboration agreements (many of which are 'unilateral/bilateral' rather than UK-Brussels anyway). I'm strongly opposed to "taxation without representation" (ie joining SM) which is (IMO) even worse than 'full-fat' EU membership although I hope someone does ask Sir Ed how much per year that would cost (£12bn+??) and where the money would come from (eg defund the NHS??)

* Not sure if any new "news" but from last month:
www.theguardian.com/science/2023/apr/17/uk-will-not-have-to-pay-for-last-two-years-if-it-rejoins-horizon-scheme-eu-says

[jimjam]

Trev - re those YGs:

I think the below is one to keep an eye on.

Of course unionists who vote SNP (I guess they think the best party to stand up for Scotland or prefer their other policies) is the corollary.

''2. Yes voters who don't consider independence a top issue atm
Lab: 23% (+12)
SNP: 59% (-12)''

[hireton]

New Scottish poll from Survation. I think Yousaf and the SNP will be relieved that there has not been a bigger impact on SNP VI and on support for independence:

[Mr Poppy]

May 9, 2023 19:48:28 GMT c-a-r-f-r-e-w said:

So what do people think is the minimum likely Tory recovery before the GE and does that still likely deliver an OM for Labour?

A short while ago then I said Rishi-CON might well get to 200+ in GE'24. Not a prediction but a "plausible scenario". Perhaps 250+ is now plausible (based on stuff like inflation coming down later this year and Rishi doing some/not all delivery of his other priorities)

If Apple create a 'time travel' app for iPhone then I can pop into the future and check the outcome and report back. However, I'll show the current "implied probabilities" from betfair:

To get the "implied probability" then use equation 1/X. 

LAB OM mid-market is 1.865 and hence 1/1.865 = 54%

CON OM mid-market is 8.9 and hence 11%

LDEM OM is up there just for fun but to sum to 100% then "No OM" mid-market is 2.82 and hence a hung parliament is 35%

www.betfair.com/exchange/plus/politics/market/1.167249195

Within "No OM" there are lots of other options but another market that people can check is "most seats" and for that

LAB most seats implied probability = 80%
(CON implied probability 20%) 

www.betfair.com/exchange/plus/politics/market/1.167249009

Folks can "assume" whatever they want for "others" but simply as an illustration then if Sum(Others) = 80 would imply either CON or LAB need 285+ to win "most seats"

Beyond that people can further knock out SF (who don't show up), assume say 26?? for "Billy no mates2*" SNP but add in some minnows (eg SDLP, Alliance, Green) who might back a LAB min.govt. As a rough number then LAB at 300-320 is the "zone" where an agreement with LDEM would come into play and whilst betfair don't have a market for that then folks can see it would be <20% from LAB most seats%.

* CON are "Billy no mates1" and I doubt even the DUP would be daft enough to work with CON again. Hence CON would need OM to form a new "full term" govt after GE'24. However, there is a "messy zone" where CON win most seats but LAB+LDEM+minnows isn't enough to pass a King's Speech. At that point SNP come into play and who knows what happens then - maybe a "do over" with Rishi staying in #10 until the outcome of GE'25 (a few months after end of 2024) is known?? 

[pjw1961]

May 10, 2023 12:19:47 GMT c-a-r-f-r-e-w said:

May 10, 2023 12:11:36 GMT pjw1961 said:

Telegraph stuff is pay-walled, so without seeing the details this sounds like a "non-story" public relations announcement of something that has been been around for a while, i.e. Doctor's Assistants. They have the same relationship to doctors as HCAs (Health Care Assistants) do to qualified nurses - or, for the accountants among us, AAT does to the professional accountancy bodies. You get a lesser qualification and some practical experience that gives you a route into being a doctor/nurse/accountant, but you still then need to undertake further study/exams to be qualified.

Here is a link to a job advert as an example of the type of duties: vacancies.royaldevon.nhs.uk/jobs/job/Doctors-Assistant/2405

If the Telegraph article is saying something different, I would be interested to know.

.  

“The apprenticeship scheme could allow one in 10 doctors to start work without a traditional medical degree, straight after their A-levels. A third of nurses are also expected to be trained under the "radical new approach".
….

Amanda Pritchard, the head of NHS England, said: “This radical new approach could see tens of thousands of school-leavers becoming doctors and nurses or other key healthcare roles, after being trained on the job over the next 25 years."

…


Health officials said the “medical doctor degree apprenticeship” involves the same training and standards as traditional education routes, including a medical degree and all the requirements of the General Medical Council.

Candidates will be expected to have similar A-levels as those for medical school, with qualifications in sciences, as well as options for graduates with non-medical degrees.

The key difference behind such models is that apprentice medics would be available on the wards almost immediately, working under supervision, while being paid.

…

Under the five-year scheme, which has 200 places over two years, apprentices will study alongside work, allowing them to “put newly acquired knowledge and skills into practice immediately”.

…

Existing nursing apprenticeships, which allow recruits to earn on the ward during a four-year training course, are expected to be expanded under the scheme.

The idea has been debated for several years, with some medics raising concerns that it could create a “two-tier system” with apprentice degrees seen as “lesser”.

…

Pay rates for the schemes have yet to be announced, with concern that less wealthy candidates could opt for the programme because they fear student debt, only to find their long-term earnings are overtaken by those on traditional training routes.”

Thanks for posting. It does indeed sound very similar to the Doctor's Assistant role and I suspect a rebadging/relaunch. I think I first heard of Doctor's Assistants about three year's ago, so fits with "the idea has been debated for several years" comment.

It is a perfectly good idea, but they are in no sense "doctors" until they are qualified - essentially boils down to one training route will be to spend a lot of time in academia and some time in a working hospital and the other will be to spend a lot of time in a working hospital and some time in academia. 

[Mr Poppy]

May 10, 2023 12:25:34 GMT Mark said:

I have been ruminating over the policing of the coronation over the last few days.

This is something that has left me chilled to the bone - but, not quite for the reasons you would expect.

It's not that the new lws put in place werent rushed - they were, or that that don't differentiate effectively between nuisance and genuine criminality - they don't, or that people's rights are being taken away - they are.

On one level, I get it. They had a made for TV event beaming out to the whole world and they didn't want the equaivalent of someone waving frantically and shouting "'allo Mum!" at a live broadcast...especially when those waving have an anti-monarchist message to boot.

What really chilled me to the bone was the report on the news that one of the protesters had been spotted with facial recognition...which he was added to after throwing an egg on a previous occasion.

This previous occasion being long, long before the rushed legislation for the coronation.

I can see that something like facial recognition may be useful for, say, kiddie-fiddlers or for those that attack others with large knives (as detailed on the news yesterday), but, throwing an egg???

YG asked about that.

Facial recognition is facial recognition. What the "human" then does with the info (eg is the "face" on a terrorist watchlist v having thrown an egg) is then up to the "human" - for now at least. Maybe one day we'll have AI powered "Judge Dredd" Robocops? 

[pjw1961]

Just a thought that crossed my mind concerning the Conservatives lack of potential coalition partners in a hung parliament.

The Conservatives shafted the Liberal Democrats over the AV referendum (granting it but turning the full Tory press/party machine onto getting a no vote) and then shafted them again in 2015 by actively targeting Lib Dem held seats.

They then shafted the DUP over Brexit and the NIP (Johnson's promise of no border in the Irish Sea and then agreeing one).

If you want to have allies perhaps that was not the most sensible of behaviour?

[jimjam]

Trevor,

Yes the messy Zone is one Labour are keen to avoid.

I would think that if Lab+LD still short of 322 but ahead of Cons the SNP would abstain on VoNC so a Labour led Government would be in place.

They (SNP) though would endeavor to use their leverage to further their aims which is legitimate.

Under such a circumstance I would expect a short term (6-12 months) LD/Lab arrangement followed by a second GE.


NB) There must be a number that a Labour party short of an OM would go it alone and dare the other parties to vote down.

Also, a min number of LDs for them to be credibly able to push for a coalition, personally I can't see them reaching enough and a time limited C&S arrangement would be more plausible.

[thylacine]

May 10, 2023 13:55:03 GMT pjw1961 said:

Just a thought that crossed my mind concerning the Conservatives lack of potential coalition partners in a hung parliament.

The Conservatives shafted the Liberal Democrats over the AV referendum (granting it but turning the full Tory press/party machine onto getting a no vote) and then shafted them again in 2015 by actively targeting Lib Dem held seats.

They then shafted the DUP over Brexit and the NIP (Johnson's promise of no border in the Irish Sea and then agreeing one).

If you want to have allies perhaps that was not the most sensible of behaviour?

To be honest I would say it's almost impossible to shaft the DUP. They were the tail wagging the dog for so long over Brexit even after being bought off with huge sums of money for NI. Still they can't behave and continue to risk the agreement. They deserve more than shafting for what they've done to the UK and risked in NI. Pure poison in a coalition , I doubt they'd allow themselves to be buggered in the same way the Libdems did. They benefit from NI special position with the EU just as much as any other NI citizen. Just not gonna be caught admitting to it. Rather ruthless poker players who played the Tories well

[steve]

George Santos in federal custody arraigned on 13 counts carrying maximum sentences of twenty years, perhaps he can get a cell next to agent Orange

[Mr Poppy]

May 10, 2023 14:02:30 GMT jimjam said:

Trevor,

Yes the messy Zone is one Labour are keen to avoid.

I would think that if Lab+LD still short of 322 but ahead of Cons the SNP would abstain on VoNC so a Labour led Government would be in place.

They (SNP) though would endeavor to use their leverage to further their aims which is legitimate.

Under such a circumstance I would expect a short term (6-12 months) LD/Lab arrangement followed by a second GE.


NB) There must be a number that a Labour party short of an OM would go it alone and dare the other parties to vote down.

Also, a min number of LDs for them to be credibly able to push for a coalition, personally I can't see them reaching enough and a time limited C&S arrangement would be more plausible.

Scotland is not our polity but linking the above to your earlier reply covering the "maybe later"* Scottish voters then it would tactically make sense for Starmer-LAB to dare other ABCON parties to keep Rishi in #10 rather than at least abstain.

Starmer could do similar with LDEM but is wise to adopt a vague "wait and see". Much will depend on the numbers and it might also suit LDEM to be "friends" but not partners with LAB - avoiding the 'doormat' issues they had under CON in the 2010-15 coalition.

"Impossible to see the future is" but comparisons to mid 1990s are often made. Blair benefitted from an economic "tail wind" that was already underway in the final years of Major-CON and whilst it is unlikely that we'll see such a NICE** decade as Blair saw then after the dark years of Covid and Ukraine related Energy price spikes then late 2020s should have a reasonable level of "feel good factor" that will benefit whoever is in #10. 

Hence, once in #10 then Starmer controls the timing. Push through some "please everyone" stuff in the first 6mths, benefit from the "tail wind" and then perhaps call a "clean up" GE to win an OM??

NB Other "plausible scenarios" are possible of course but to get out of the "messy zone" then Starmer will certainly have options and unless/until other ABCON parties agree to back (or abstain) a Starmer-LAB HMG then CON stay in power (although Rishi would be a PMINO)

* It is impossible to say whether LAB's rise in Scotland is purely due to the 'incumbent' issues of SNP (in Scotland) and CON (in GB) but we see in other Indy polling that a lot of Scots think now/soon is not the time for IndyRef2. It might be difficult to keep "No + maybe later" voters forever but quite possibly a lot of Scots who might want to see what happens under a LAB HMG - which partially covers the unprovable "view" that SNP prefer a CON HMG  

** Non-Inflationary Constant Expansion. 

PS IMO the "number" needs to be at least "most seats" (probably 285+). Doesn't have to be but it would give more credibility to Starmer if LAB at least won "most seats" and bookies currently price that at 80% implied probability. 

[neilj]

May 10, 2023 14:45:00 GMT steve said:

George Santos in federal custody arraigned on 13 counts carrying maximum sentences of twenty years, perhaps he can get a cell next to agent Orange

.

One of the many charges was whilst earning 120,000 a year he falsely claimed unemployment benefit, not only greedy but an idiot aswell

[neilj]

More broken promises ftom Sunak, although in this case glad he did

[Mr Poppy]

May 10, 2023 14:21:53 GMT thylacine said:

May 10, 2023 13:55:03 GMT pjw1961 said:

Just a thought that crossed my mind concerning the Conservatives lack of potential coalition partners in a hung parliament.

The Conservatives shafted the Liberal Democrats over the AV referendum (granting it but turning the full Tory press/party machine onto getting a no vote) and then shafted them again in 2015 by actively targeting Lib Dem held seats.

They then shafted the DUP over Brexit and the NIP (Johnson's promise of no border in the Irish Sea and then agreeing one).

If you want to have allies perhaps that was not the most sensible of behaviour?

To be honest I would say it's almost impossible to shaft the DUP. They were the tail wagging the dog for so long over Brexit even after being bought off with huge sums of money for NI. Still they can't behave and continue to risk the agreement. They deserve more than shafting for what they've done to the UK and risked in NI. Pure poison in a coalition , I doubt they'd allow themselves to be buggered in the same way the Libdems did. They benefit from NI special position with the EU just as much as any other NI citizen. Just not gonna be caught admitting to it. Rather ruthless poker players who played the Tories well

Follow up to reply I just posted to jimjam then May should never have "bought" the DUP votes in 2017. The few votes that DUP did back May on (eg the Queen's Speech that allowed May to stay in #10) could have likely come for "free" by daring DUP to vote CON out of power and risk a Corbyn-LAB HMG that would probably have held, and won, a 2nd EURef.  

Although it was Boris, then Rishi, who drove the bus over DUP then DUP had already sown their own fate by refusing to back May's deal and hence IMO they "shafted" themselves  - useful eejits (like the ERG) IMO

To the future, then DUP would unlikely vote for a LAB HMG so in the "messy zone" outcome of GE'24 (29?) then DUP are perhaps a bit like SNP and "Billy no mates" as well. Would DUP be "free votes" for a future CON HMG (to stop/remove a LAB HMG)? I dunno - maybe once some time has passed?

However, Starmer-LAB is very different to Corbyn-LAB so it is also possible that DUP abstain in the "messy zone" for a while at least. I can't see Starmer-LAB being able to offer them anything and TBC if DUP ever end their Stormont strike but CON don't seem in any rush to sort it out and until DUP back down then NI will be governed by CON HMG (and then maybe a LAB HMG from GE'24?)

'Deadlines are deadly': Pointless setting timeline for Stormont return, says Chris Heaton-Harris
www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/video-news/deadlines-are-deadly-pointless-setting-timeline-for-stormont-return-says-chris-heaton-harris/1466672220.html

 

[Mr Poppy]

Since NI came up then there was new NI polling from Lucid Talks y'day (which someone might have already posted??). I'll pick the most interesting one given that IMO a change is required - although CON HMG should perhaps quietly "threaten" that change to give DUP a chance to save themselves. If DUP keep saying "no, no, no" then run the bus back over them and see if UUP benefit (or maybe just leave it for Starmer to sort out   )

[Mr Poppy]

Obviously not my polity but NI's LE's are on 18May. Whilst LEs and not a Stormont election then UUP are seeking to take advantage of DUP's "issue" (and I've included someone's BTL "guess" on what DUP are intending to do)

[alec]

Interesting to see the reaction to the government announcement about better phone systems for doctors as the answer to all our health problems. Clearly, it's baloney. The problem is the growth of demand and the shrinkage of the workforce.

I've been keeping a watching eye on the twitter feed of GP Dr Dave Triska (Dave_dlt). He's ex-army, now a GP in SE England, so perhaps unlikely to be a moaning wet liberal type, and his twitter profile is open, with pictures and details of his practice, so while anecdotal, we can be pretty sure this is genuine. He raises the interesting point that one of the announcements, that pharmacies will be able to prescribe for some simpler conditions, while potentially useful, will mean that average GP consultation times will rise. If you strip out the simple conditions, then what's left are the more complex cases. Unless that is factored into the planning, the benefits will not be as great as hoped.

He also makes it clear that demand is the problem. He said this week that on a single day, 3% of his patients were trying to get appointments, something he didn't see before 2020. He tweeted the following yesterday, in response to a question asking why he was so busy:

"I’ve never dealt with a background level of infectious illness like this. Ever."

Possibly worth also noting that while the Zoe app shows cases rising again, it suggests just over 1m active infections, but if the app is to be believed, we are actually in a trough at present (albeit a high trough) yet we have doctors publicly stating the background level of this infectious disease is crippling them.

This morning's story about the excess deaths from diabetes is also part of this picture. The report was written by Diabetes UK, and based on a survey, which highlighted how difficult it was to access timely care, with calculations of the possible loss of life arising from this. Diabetes UK has previously issued reports raising the alarm at the impact of covid on new diabetes diagnoses and progression of existing conditions, but the pressure on health services is completely to be expected in the current climate.

I've always found it strange that so many people struggle to accept that there can be more than one factor influencing an outcome. It's beyond doubt that the slow degradation of NHS services since 2010 is exerting a negative impact on citizens, but it's also beyond obvious that a persistent and often severe infection, with all manner of post acute impacts, is also having a serious impact on health system capacity.

Both problems need sorting out. One is going to take years of training, investment and organisational reform. The other could be largely addressed in a matter of weeks, if there was the political will. And if we did that, sorting out the capacity issues would be far easier and cheaper.

[c-a-r-f-r-e-w]

May 10, 2023 13:42:31 GMT pjw1961 said:

May 10, 2023 12:19:47 GMT c-a-r-f-r-e-w said:

“The apprenticeship scheme could allow one in 10 doctors to start work without a traditional medical degree, straight after their A-levels. A third of nurses are also expected to be trained under the "radical new approach".
….

Amanda Pritchard, the head of NHS England, said: “This radical new approach could see tens of thousands of school-leavers becoming doctors and nurses or other key healthcare roles, after being trained on the job over the next 25 years."

…


Health officials said the “medical doctor degree apprenticeship” involves the same training and standards as traditional education routes, including a medical degree and all the requirements of the General Medical Council.

Candidates will be expected to have similar A-levels as those for medical school, with qualifications in sciences, as well as options for graduates with non-medical degrees.

The key difference behind such models is that apprentice medics would be available on the wards almost immediately, working under supervision, while being paid.

…

Under the five-year scheme, which has 200 places over two years, apprentices will study alongside work, allowing them to “put newly acquired knowledge and skills into practice immediately”.

…

Existing nursing apprenticeships, which allow recruits to earn on the ward during a four-year training course, are expected to be expanded under the scheme.

The idea has been debated for several years, with some medics raising concerns that it could create a “two-tier system” with apprentice degrees seen as “lesser”.

…

Pay rates for the schemes have yet to be announced, with concern that less wealthy candidates could opt for the programme because they fear student debt, only to find their long-term earnings are overtaken by those on traditional training routes.”

Thanks for posting. It does indeed sound very similar to the Doctor's Assistant role and I suspect a rebadging/relaunch. I think I first heard of Doctor's Assistants about three year's ago, so fits with "the idea has been debated for several years" comment.

It is a perfectly good idea, but they are in no sense "doctors" until they are qualified - essentially boils down to one training route will be to spend a lot of time in academia and some time in a working hospital and the other will be to spend a lot of time in a working hospital and some time in academia. 

Reading around, the doctor’s assistant role seems different? It’s developed out of the existing Heaithcare assistant role:

healthmanagement.org/c/healthmanagement/issuearticle/award-winning-new-doctors-assistants-freeing-time-in-acute-nhs-hospitals

“We undertook a six-month pilot of appointing/developing six Doctors’ Assistants at pay Band 3 from our existing Healthcare Assistants…

…the education team and managers identified key delegable tasks traditionally done by ward/training/on-call doctors (cannulation, dementia screening, drafting discharge summaries, venepuncture, writing in notes, finding test results and taking requests) and devised a two-week induction course.”

Giving them a few delegable tasks to save time, which is a long way from progressing toward being a fully qualified doctor as with the apprenticeship, and couldn’t find a route from the Doctor’s assistant role towards being a fully qualified doctor, unlike the apprenticeship. It only required a couple weeks training (on top of whatever was required to be band 3 healthcare assistant already presumably).

in fact even healthcare assistants can be rather more developed, since the bands go quite a bit higher? Healthcare assistants with further training on that pathway go on to be nurses etc., and then more advanced nursing roles, (as well as pharmacists, physiotherapists etc.) rather than Doctors?

“In the UK NHS, most staff are on pay bands of ‘Agenda for Change’; Band 5 is typically for a staff nurse on qualification or similar degree-level staff who often have Registration with a national body; Bands 6, 7, 8a and 8b signify progressively more autonomous clinical or managerial roles with additional training, expertise and salary (NHS employers, 2017). There are many good initiatives to develop Registered autonomous staff into Practitioner level (Band 6, 7 or 8a)”

[steve]

It strikes me as bizarre that the Tories would think that bringing up the possibility of a deal between the lib dems and labour ,who between them would likely to have secured around 55- 60% of the votes cast would discourage people from voting for either party.

Why it would be a unique opportunity for the majority of the electorate to get the party they voted for into office.

[pjw1961]

Britain Elects saying that their ward by ward analysis of the locals suggests Labour heading for an overall majority:

[pjw1961]

May 10, 2023 15:59:21 GMT c-a-r-f-r-e-w said:

May 10, 2023 13:42:31 GMT pjw1961 said:

Thanks for posting. It does indeed sound very similar to the Doctor's Assistant role and I suspect a rebadging/relaunch. I think I first heard of Doctor's Assistants about three year's ago, so fits with "the idea has been debated for several years" comment.

It is a perfectly good idea, but they are in no sense "doctors" until they are qualified - essentially boils down to one training route will be to spend a lot of time in academia and some time in a working hospital and the other will be to spend a lot of time in a working hospital and some time in academia. 

Reading around, the doctor’s assistant role seems different? It’s developed out of the existing Heaithcare assistant role:

healthmanagement.org/c/healthmanagement/issuearticle/award-winning-new-doctors-assistants-freeing-time-in-acute-nhs-hospitals

“We undertook a six-month pilot of appointing/developing six Doctors’ Assistants at pay Band 3 from our existing Healthcare Assistants…

…the education team and managers identified key delegable tasks traditionally done by ward/training/on-call doctors (cannulation, dementia screening, drafting discharge summaries, venepuncture, writing in notes, finding test results and taking requests) and devised a two-week induction course.”

Giving them a few delegable tasks to save time, which is a long way from progressing toward being a fully qualified doctor as with the apprenticeship, and couldn’t find a route from the Doctor’s assistant role towards being a fully qualified doctor, unlike the apprenticeship. It only required a couple weeks training (on top of whatever was required to be band 3 healthcare assistant already presumably).

in fact even healthcare assistants can be rather more developed, since the bands go quite a bit higher? Healthcare assistants with further training on that pathway go on to be nurses etc., and then more advanced nursing roles, rather than Doctors.

“In the UK NHS, most staff are on pay bands of ‘Agenda for Change’; Band 5 is typically for a staff nurse on qualification or similar degree-level staff who often have Registration with a national body; Bands 6, 7, 8a and 8b signify progressively more autonomous clinical or managerial roles with additional training, expertise and salary (NHS employers, 2017). There are many good initiatives to develop Registered autonomous staff into Practitioner level (Band 6, 7 or 8a)”

There likely isn't an NHS wide definition of the Doctor Assistant role. As it envisaged at the Trust I work for it is a higher skilled post than an HCA and should therefore attract a higher banding. However, I'm not adamant about it; perhaps this is a new proposal. Either way it doesn't seem a problem except for the spin that these people are additional 'doctors' - they aren't, until fully trained and qualified. 

[c-a-r-f-r-e-w]

May 10, 2023 16:17:41 GMT pjw1961 said:

May 10, 2023 15:59:21 GMT c-a-r-f-r-e-w said:

Reading around, the doctor’s assistant role seems different? It’s developed out of the existing Heaithcare assistant role:

healthmanagement.org/c/healthmanagement/issuearticle/award-winning-new-doctors-assistants-freeing-time-in-acute-nhs-hospitals

“We undertook a six-month pilot of appointing/developing six Doctors’ Assistants at pay Band 3 from our existing Healthcare Assistants…

…the education team and managers identified key delegable tasks traditionally done by ward/training/on-call doctors (cannulation, dementia screening, drafting discharge summaries, venepuncture, writing in notes, finding test results and taking requests) and devised a two-week induction course.”

Giving them a few delegable tasks to save time, which is a long way from progressing toward being a fully qualified doctor as with the apprenticeship, and couldn’t find a route from the Doctor’s assistant role towards being a fully qualified doctor, unlike the apprenticeship. It only required a couple weeks training (on top of whatever was required to be band 3 healthcare assistant already presumably).

in fact even healthcare assistants can be rather more developed, since the bands go quite a bit higher? Healthcare assistants with further training on that pathway go on to be nurses etc., and then more advanced nursing roles, rather than Doctors.

“In the UK NHS, most staff are on pay bands of ‘Agenda for Change’; Band 5 is typically for a staff nurse on qualification or similar degree-level staff who often have Registration with a national body; Bands 6, 7, 8a and 8b signify progressively more autonomous clinical or managerial roles with additional training, expertise and salary (NHS employers, 2017). There are many good initiatives to develop Registered autonomous staff into Practitioner level (Band 6, 7 or 8a)”

There likely isn't an NHS wide definition of the Doctor Assistant role. As it envisaged at the Trust I work for it is a higher skilled post than an HCA and should therefore attract a higher banding. However, I'm not adamant about it; perhaps this is a new proposal. Either way it doesn't seem a problem except for the spin that these people are additional 'doctors' - they aren't, until fully trained and qualified. 

It might attract a higher banding but the issue would remain: does it then go on to lead to becoming a Doctor as with the apprenticeship? However the key issue might be whether the learn-more-on-the-job model is as good a route as learning more on the degree. 

[Mr Poppy]

Still in -ve territory and I'm not sure what has happened to deserve the uptick just yet (later in the year was my "inspired guess") but on the two most important issues:

and

#Ready4Rishi

[steve]

Jacob Rees Mogg and mini me prepare to defend his constituency.

[alec]

I suspect the Daily Telegraph headline about these doctors apprenticeships is more about pitch rolling for the removal of restrictions on child labour.

The US right is busy reversing laws that prevent child labour (one state now allows 15 year olds to work a full factory shift after scrapping protections). It's part of how the right are using labour shortages as an excuse to revert to Victorian era standards. The Telegraph loves it, so I wouldn't be surprised if they tweaked to press release to suit their agenda.

[Mr Poppy]

Looks like Starmer-LAB might back the 'Illegal Immigration Bill' when it comes back to HoC (or at least abstain). If he is not going to repeal it then back it (as per Brexit) or abstain and be grateful that Rishi is sorting it out. LAB's "own migration plans" basically being the same as CON anyway but with some cakeism attached (eg agreeing "returns" with France when France has already said "non" and Dublin III has collapsed so there is no functioning "returns" within EU either)

?

[steve]

Andrew Bridgen described by a former Tory minister as "antisemitic, anti-vax, anti-scientific conspiracy theorist"

Has become the first MP for Reflux, revolting or some other orc infested bunch of right wing loons beginning with Re.

I'm sure the electorate of North West Leicester will be delighted

[pjw1961]

On the Britain Elects/New Statesman 'ward by ward' analysis. Having read the article and, in particular, studied the table of 69 currently Tory constituencies, it looks like we are to some degree heading back toward pre-Brexit voting patterns, although not totally so.

For example in Thanet South (Labour target 111, but not a 'traditional' Labour seat, won only in the Blair landslides) Labour lead by 4%, but in Great Grimsby (target 114, but a traditional Labour area) Labour are 10% ahead. Likewise Labour have stonking great leads in other traditional Labour seats such as West Bromwich East (26%), Bolsover (19%), Wakefield (25%), Burnley (19%). Labour has a 9% lead in Cannock Chase - target number 275!

However, it is clear that some change is also going on. From example Labour 'won' Aldershot 41% to 35%, a seat even Blair couldn't take.

Of the 69 seats examined Con win 33 (they are not all marginals, there are many safe seats included), Labour win 24, the Lib Dems 9 and the Greens 3. 

In case you are wondering where the Green ones are: they are 35% to 35% with the Tories in Bury St Edmunds, 28% to 25% ahead in Folkestone and Hythe and 31% to 25% in Forest of Dean, so probably unlikely they would actually win any of those in a GE.

(Edit: In case anyone saw my post earlier and wonders why the seat numbers have changed I spotted some duplication in the table and have now removed it). 

[neilj]

Yet more blue on blue attacks

[alec]

Have to love the Greens. I've just had an email from them, titled "National Action Weekends coming soon in Bristol and Suffolk".

I suppose to the Greens, Suffolk and Bristol really are national.