Quote:
Originally Posted by Stop It
Yet they managed to meet a 98% target in England for A&E depts to see patients within 4 hours most of the time. Since the Tories took over they set the target to 95% and promptly made that target look optimistic.
It has been nearly 5 years since the Tories have taken over yet things have got progressively worse. How long can you get by blaming the previous lot when the Tories have shown themselves to be less than competent?
LAB may have made a lot of mistakes in their tenure but they cared a significant amount more about the NHS than the Tories do. They simply do not care a jot about it and would rather be shot of it and would do if it wasn't political suicide.
|
Blaming the Tories for what they've done/haven't done is one thing but letting Labour claim that it's nothing to do with them is quite another. In spite of all the money they chucked around (including the massively expensive PFI contracts they've tied the taxpayer too) things were not significantly better when they were running the show during their supposed 'boom' years. All was not rosy in A&E in 2010 and that was after 13 years of supposed Labour TLC and a parliamentary majority which enabled them to do as they wish. What a crock! Contrast that with the situation HMG - an unhappy coalition - inherited and then tell me that they were ever going to be able to reverse the situation, especially given Labour's renegotiation of the GP's contract which has led to so many people not being able to get appointments.
What Labour 'care' about is very different from what they actually 'deliver' IMHO and they weren't part of a coalition struggling with a massive deficit and pathetic notes telling them all the money had been spent FGS. More Labour 'care' eh?
They really care about social engineering and creating a dependant society. Chucking money at the NHS doesn't mean they care about it - IMHO it means they care about the votes their supposed 'care' generates. They introduced plenty of private enterprise into the NHS all on their own without any help from evil NHS hating Tories or did you miss that bit? Private involvement which we will be paying for for decades. In Staffs, they presided over just about the single worst example of institutionalised abuse you could wish to imagine with hundreds of deaths due to negligence and neglect. Odd how we don't hear them talk much about that now eh? Too busy hoping we've all forgotten about that scandal and banging on about A&E in winter. How's about that for Labour 'care' eh?
If we contrast the 13 years they had and wasted with the 5 years HMG has had, it's perfectly clear who's had the harder job and in the worst of economic environments. If Labour had carried on where they left off the NHS would have collapsed. As for your 'targets', during their period in power, we used to get all sorts of hospital appointments which, when we turned up were nothing more that box ticking exercises, nothing new, no treatment, no nothing - a total waste of time for all concerned but a nice shiny star on the target chart showing how much they 'cared' about us. More people seen more often!! Great eh??!! Real success in terms of outcomes...
---------- Post added at 08:58 ---------- Previous post was at 08:51 ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by martyh
How much of this issue is down to a lack of recources and how much is simply bad management
|
That's where a lot of the problems lie IMHO. You only have to look at what the various exposes of the NHS over the years demonstrated to see how inefficient so much of it is. Albeit not connected with sexy 'A&E', James Martin's documentary about hospital food revealed massive waste, outdated methods and inept management which was frankly scandalous. Small beer you could argue except that we've seen it repeated in procurement, IT etc. involving vast sums of money which could have been spent on what really matters - treating people.