A blatant lie about the NHS

[fillyboy]

PFI - look and see who used it first. Initially launched in 1992 by Prime Minister John Major, PFI is part of the wider programme
One side effect is that it reduces public borrowing - some other entity does it.

Fair enough, but:

Two months after Tony Blair's Labour Party took office, the Health Secretary, Alan Milburn, announced that "when there is a limited amount of public-sector capital available, as there is, it's PFI or bust".[11] PFI expanded considerably in 1996 and then expanded much further under New Labour with the NHS (Private Finance) Act 1997,[13] resulting in criticism from many trade unions, elements of the New Labour Party, the Scottish National Party (SNP), and the Green Party,[14] as well as commentators such as George Monbiot. Proponents of the PFI include the World Bank, the IMF and the Confederation of British Industry.[15]

 

[ajohn]

Actually I think you will find the current lot ended PFI with the proviso that it would continue for a while. That after making much criticism of labour for using it but that's politics. I'm agnostic on that and am more interested in results.

Blair's problem really was the banks and Iraq. Iraq was backed by the Tories as well - that direct from their leader at the time. Like some others we always follow USA foreign policy. Opinions for the reasons vary but generally involve help. The bank problem was the banks. An "amusing" aspect was the Tory reaction when Labour expressed that they were going to apply some legislation in their direction. No idea if it happened or what it was other than Browns attempt to put the bank of england controls purely down to themselves. In times of trouble that hasn't worked out. They are unable to use the controls that should be used.

Messing in foreign countries - often oil is involved. Different regimes too. International politics stinks.

 

[Scarlet Pimpernel]

You've missed the point of that part of my post. I'm explaining why no one would buy the NHS in it's entirety

The government cannot sell that which it is obliged to provide.
It can only contract out the parts or the whole of the service. But the government would remain the 'client'.
Therefore your comments are based on a misnomer.

The government would have to enact legislation to completely alter the basis of healthcare provided in UK, so that it is no longer obliged to provide it.

To use an analogy: If I was fed up of doing the gardening at chez-nous, I couldn't 'sell' the gardening. I could contract someone else to do it, and I would pay them a fee, and they would have to do it to my satisfaction.
If I wanted to 'sell' the gardening, I would have to sell the garden with it. Then I wouldn't have a garden, and the boundaries of my property would have been changed.

 

[JohnD]

The nation used to own the Trustee Savings Bank* but it was sold off. The public used to own the water boards, electricity boards, National Grid and CEGB. And railways. And BT. And the Royal Mail.

All sold off.

And a source of great profit to their owners, many of which are overseas, and some of which have raisd enormous debts which they have paid out as dividends, although the interest on these debts is added to the customers' bills.

Currently, we still own the Police, the NHS, some of the prisons, and most of the motorways.

Do you think your Government has a deep conviction against selling off anything that isn't (or is) nailed down?



*disputed

 

[Scarlet Pimpernel]

The nation used to own the Trustee Savings Bank* but it was sold off. The public used to own the water boards, electricity boards, National Grid and CEGB. And railways. And BT. And the Royal Mail.

All sold off.

And a source of great profit to their owners, many of which are overseas, and some of which have raisd enormous debts which they have paid out as dividends, although the interest on these debts is added to the customers' bills.

Currently, we still own the Police, the NHS, some of the prisons, and most of the motorways.

Do you think your Government has a deep conviction against selling off anything that isn't (or is) nailed down?



*disputed

Those services have fee-paying customers. Fees that should pay for the running of the service and provide some profit.
The NHS, in general does not have fee-paying customers.

Some services can experience a disinvestment, where some parts are sold off, but other parts are retained.
There are several models, such as franchising, and out-sourcing.

 

[JohnD]

Is that a "no?"

 

[Scarlet Pimpernel]

Do you think your Government has a deep conviction against selling off anything that isn't (or is) nailed down?

Is that a "no?"

Are we referring to UK, or French government?

 

[transam]

The nation used to own the Trustee Savings Bank* but it was sold off. The public used to own the water boards, electricity boards, National Grid and CEGB. And railways. And BT. And the Royal Mail.

All sold off.

And a source of great profit to their owners, many of which are overseas, and some of which have raisd enormous debts which they have paid out as dividends, although the interest on these debts is added to the customers' bills.

Currently, we still own the Police, the NHS, some of the prisons, and most of the motorways.

Do you think your Government has a deep conviction against selling off anything that isn't (or is) nailed down?



*disputed

Used to own
British Leyland
British air ways
Cooke’s the travel agents
British steel

as well

 

[ajohn]

Currently, we still own the Police, the NHS, some of the prisons, and most of the motorways.

Bobby's having one of his distorted moments best to just ignore. He part lives in parallel universe and also another country. His rather odd view ignores the fact that the gov provided a number of things formed and paid for with our taxes and then sold them. I haven't mentioned what happened to the money gained, also from oil. Some are probably well aware of that aspect.

Main reason for posting was motorways. A grand idea initially but never completed as it was becoming too expensive. The exits and adding services adds to their costs.

 

[transam]

The government cannot sell that which it is obliged to provide.
It can only contract out the parts or the whole of the service. But the government would remain the 'client'.
Therefore your comments are based on a misnomer.

The government would have to enact legislation to completely alter the basis of healthcare provided in UK, so that it is no longer obliged to provide it.

To use an analogy: If I was fed up of doing the gardening at chez-nous, I couldn't 'sell' the gardening. I could contract someone else to do it, and I would pay them a fee, and they would have to do it to my satisfaction.
If I wanted to 'sell' the gardening, I would have to sell the garden with it. Then I wouldn't have a garden, and the boundaries of my property would have been changed.

I read that and blimey I have to admit it makes sense

jeez us I am agreeing with him

 

[fillyboy]

Bobby's having one of his distorted moments best to just ignore. He part lives in parallel universe and also another country. His rather odd view

John, in all the time we've known each, I believe that's the most profound thing I've 'heard' you say. Top man.

 

[ajohn]

John, in all the time we've known each, I believe that's the most profound thing I've 'heard' you say. Top man.

It's a complicated subject. Some things have been nationalised and later denationalised. You'd think that gets around my point but unlike Iran when things are nationalised here they are bought using our money.

There are concerns about privatised utilities in several european countries. One aspect is lack of effective competition and the other is increasing debt. Shares get sold and finish up in different countries doesn't seem to worry some but bugs me, why should I help pay Canadian pensions silly example to make a point. One that oddly has been mentioned, true or not pass but some one is getting it.

What he fails to realise is that it doesn't matter how health services are supplied only that we get it.

 

[Scarlet Pimpernel]

What he fails to realise is that it doesn't matter how health services are supplied only that we get it.

What you fail to realise is that you can't sell the NHS. You can out-source it, privatise it, contract it out, disinvest it or parts of it (as in PFI), but you can't sell it within any reasonable time frame.
In order to sell it you'd have to replace the whole model of health care provision in UK. That would take decades of similarly minded governments to gradually replace the model of health care in UK, and potentially leave many without access to health care.

 

[ajohn]

What you fail to realise is that you can't sell the NHS. You can out-source it, privatise it, contract it out, disinvest it or parts of it (as in PFI), but you can't sell it within any reasonable time frame.
In order to sell it you'd have to replace the whole model of health care provision in UK. That would take decades of similarly minded governments to gradually replace the model of health care in UK, and potentially leave many without access to health care.

I see you now appreciate the point I was making. It's highly unlikely that anyone would buy it not in a strict buy manner anyway.

 

[Scarlet Pimpernel]

I see you now appreciate the point I was making. It's highly unlikely that anyone would buy it not in a strict buy manner anyway.

It's highly unlikely that anyone could buy that which can't be sold.