A nice little earner.

[Hamble]

Of course I disagree with taxpayers money ending up in the back pockets of shareholders, when it should be spent on patient care. Unfortunately we are already a long way down the road of NHS privatisation which began under the Blair Government and has been gathering pace ever since. I am very much on the side of keeping privatisation out of the NHS (and certainly other essential services such as the prison service). Keeping the NHS in the public sector has always been UKIP policy and will always remain so.
I think you would be very surprised how similar my political views are to yours in many respects.
The major difference between us is that I don't aggressively attack everyone who carries a different political label.

The horseshoe theory.

[silver fox]

I am very much on the side of keeping privatisation out of the NHS (and certainly other essential services such as the prison service). Keeping the NHS in the public sector has always been UKIP policy and will always remain so.

You have of course cleared this with your new shiny leader, who appears to have considerable memory lapses, even to where he was on specific days.

If memory serves me right UKIP mouthpieces have not exactly sung the praises of the NHS until it dawned on them just how important to the British voter the NHS actually is.

https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rc...U6MXboighsjpNw

[Nomad]

I think you would be very surprised how similar my political views are to yours in many respects.

I don't think so.

You're a member of a petty nationalist, xenophobic, right-wing party, with many racist and sexist elements within its ranks. Despite your party's supposed ban on ex-BNP members joining, many seem to have no trouble signing up with you, including at least one within your own local party.

You yourseld have shared a platform with some extremely distasteful individuals, from Neil Hamilton (the apartheid supporter who himself has shared platforms with both Jean-Marie le Pen and Alessandra Mussolini) to Jack Sen (the white supremacist who's also an apartheid supporter).

Your two main leaders (Malay and Nuttall) have both advocated the break up and privatisation of the NHS. Malay was also vocal at one stage about repealing racial equality legislation, following which you failed to comment when I asked you directly why anyone other than a racist would make such a suggestion.

By the way, pointing put these facts doesn't constitute an aggressive attack on "a different political label," but I think we all know why you'd want to draw attention away from my asking if you wanted to comment on Nuttall's lies about Hillsborough. I see you're also staying well away from Silver Fox's thread on UKIP Supporters.

It won't do you any good. We both know that Nuttall's and Banks' remarks will be remembered the next time we all go to the polls.

[Hamble]

UKIP have not ever been in a position to privatise nhs resources and thankfully never will.

Unlike New Labour.


https://fullfact.org/health/nhs-privatisation-numbers/

[Hamble]

Some food for thought.

Most Gp's are self employed and therefore work in the private sector.


And....Shock horror!

93% of junior doctors would back “complete privatisation” of the NHS, if it meant “substantially” increased salaries

https://iea.org.uk/93-of-junior-doct...ased-salaries/

[silver fox]

UKIP have not ever been in a position to privatise nhs resources and thankfully never will.

Unlike New Labour.


https://fullfact.org/health/nhs-privatisation-numbers/

Here we go again, I think we all know the facts regarding admitting private providers into the NHS, but how about looking at the reasons behind it.

When "New Labour" came to power they were faced with the results of too many years of Tory misrule, maladministration and deliberate neglect. We had hospital waiting lists stretching into the not available future for far too many, we had hospital and school buildings falling into an unfit state to even enter safely let alone being places of healing and learning.

Labour had to do something, it quickly became clear that the state of the public sector did not have the resources to fix the situation in both buildings and medical care, Labour turned to the private sector, we are all very well aware that the private sector would only come on board if the returns were profitable.

Hindsight being 20/20 we are all now aware that too many contracts were far too generous, but Labour did get the waiting lists down, did start to provide new hospitals and schools, sure this created debt, but tell me which is more important, getting sick people the treatment they sorely needed, providing buildings fit for purpose, or borrowing and spending a little more than we should?

Now of course we have the Tories back and guess what the NHS is well on the slide, money has been diverted from mainstream education to fund Tory pet projects like "free" schools and selective grammar schools, in the meantime we now have situations where schools trying to balance budgets are having to drop subjects and classes, yet amazingly our financially prudent Tories manage to borrow and waste even more money than Labour ever did while throwing essential services to the wind.

If we are to struggle with debt at least let it be acquired to help people, not fund the private sector with tax breaks and even more contacts designed only to put cash in the "right" pockets.

We are now seeing the first glimmers of fresh "improvements" to our NHS, which surprise, surprise involves even more cuts, downgrading and possible closures to hospitals, particularly A&E departments, the whole damn thing stinks.

[Hamble]

Here we go again, I think we all know the facts regarding admitting private providers into the NHS, but how about looking at the reasons behind it.

When "New Labour" came to power they were faced with the results of too many years of Tory misrule, maladministration and deliberate neglect. We had hospital waiting lists stretching into the not available future for far too many, we had hospital and school buildings falling into an unfit state to even enter safely let alone being places of healing and learning.

Labour had to do something, it quickly became clear that the state of the public sector did not have the resources to fix the situation in both buildings and medical care, Labour turned to the private sector, we are all very well aware that the private sector would only come on board if the returns were profitable.

Hindsight being 20/20 we are all now aware that too many contracts were far too generous, but Labour did get the waiting lists down, did start to provide new hospitals and schools, sure this created debt, but tell me which is more important, getting sick people the treatment they sorely needed, providing buildings fit for purpose, or borrowing and spending a little more than we should?

Now of course we have the Tories back and guess what the NHS is well on the slide, money has been diverted from mainstream education to fund Tory pet projects like "free" schools and selective grammar schools, in the meantime we now have situations where schools trying to balance budgets are having to drop subjects and classes, yet amazingly our financially prudent Tories manage to borrow and waste even more money than Labour ever did while throwing essential services to the wind.

If we are to struggle with debt at least let it be acquired to help people, not fund the private sector with tax breaks and even more contacts designed only to put cash in the "right" pockets.

We are now seeing the first glimmers of fresh "improvements" to our NHS, which surprise, surprise involves even more cuts, downgrading and possible closures to hospitals, particularly A&E departments, the whole damn thing stinks.

Just read this article from 2006.


Bearing in mind the difference in the nhs today where the problem is the amount of demand on the service as a whole.



http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...ed-by-NHS.html