The Greens

This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.

The Greens

Previous Topic | Next Topic

Page 9 of 34 < 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 >

Stuk Top half 09 Dec 14 5.15pm
Quote jamiemartin721 at 09 Dec 2014 4.54pm Quote Stuk at 09 Dec 2014 4.40pm Quote Seth at 09 Dec 2014 4.23pm Quote Superfly at 09 Dec 2014 4.15pm The NHS, im my very very recent experience, is in a shocking state & getting worse. I phoned to see my GP yesterday & was told they no longer take same day appointments. There is a same day walk in clinic from 2pm but they'll only see the first 18 people. I arrived at 1pm and the queue was out the door. I called again this morning to book a future appointment - the earliest they can book me in is the 24th December. My group practice has 9 GP's and I'm willing to see any of them. I'm going to have to join my work private health care. An action I despise as I don't see why I should when we have the NHS - but a 15 day wait for a doctors appointment is unacceptable. My GP practice is similar and cuts to GP's funding are to blame. This report is from last year so it's probably even worse than then: The GP system in England is facing a "catastrophe" because of cuts in funding, doctors' leaders are warning. Analysis by the Royal College of GPs suggests that over the past three years, investment in general practice has fallen by £400m in real terms. That is equivalent to a 7% cut in spending per patient, it says. [Link] It's been like this at GP surgeries for at least a decade. They have become so pointless that you need to second guess your illness in advance to see a GP. It's not funding, it's the ratio of doctors and surgeries to people, which gets worse by the day. Arguably that's funding, if they're aren't enough GPs to go around and increasingly less incentives to work in the NHS as a GP. Arguably it's also population increase and population density. Optimistic as ever
Alert a moderator to this post

Stuk

Top half 09 Dec 14 5.15pm

Quote jamiemartin721 at 09 Dec 2014 4.54pm

Quote Stuk at 09 Dec 2014 4.40pm

Quote Seth at 09 Dec 2014 4.23pm

Quote Superfly at 09 Dec 2014 4.15pm

The NHS, im my very very recent experience, is in a shocking state & getting worse.

I phoned to see my GP yesterday & was told they no longer take same day appointments. There is a same day walk in clinic from 2pm but they'll only see the first 18 people. I arrived at 1pm and the queue was out the door. I called again this morning to book a future appointment - the earliest they can book me in is the 24th December.

My group practice has 9 GP's and I'm willing to see any of them.

I'm going to have to join my work private health care. An action I despise as I don't see why I should when we have the NHS - but a 15 day wait for a doctors appointment is unacceptable.

My GP practice is similar and cuts to GP's funding are to blame. This report is from last year so it's probably even worse than then:

The GP system in England is facing a "catastrophe" because of cuts in funding, doctors' leaders are warning.

Analysis by the Royal College of GPs suggests that over the past three years, investment in general practice has fallen by £400m in real terms.

That is equivalent to a 7% cut in spending per patient, it says.

[Link]

It's been like this at GP surgeries for at least a decade. They have become so pointless that you need to second guess your illness in advance to see a GP.

It's not funding, it's the ratio of doctors and surgeries to people, which gets worse by the day.

Arguably that's funding, if they're aren't enough GPs to go around and increasingly less incentives to work in the NHS as a GP.

Arguably it's also population increase and population density.

Optimistic as ever

Alert a moderator to this post

Stuk Top half 09 Dec 14 5.18pm
Quote jamiemartin721 at 09 Dec 2014 5.14pm Quote Stuk at 09 Dec 2014 4.16pm Quote jamiemartin721 at 09 Dec 2014 3.27pm Quote Stuk at 08 Dec 2014 5.20pm Quote jamiemartin721 at 08 Dec 2014 5.01pm Quote matt_himself at 08 Dec 2014 4.55pm Quote jamiemartin721 at 08 Dec 2014 4.46pm I don't think people are against the idea of paying tax, rather they're more against the way in which its spent (or wasted) on things like vanity projects and political egotism. Tax payers money is not just wasted on vanity projects and political egotism. It is wasted by those running public services. It has been proven that reducing public spending reduces waste and the waste that departments makes is criminal. Look at the recent news about the amount spent by the NHS on paracetamol. It was something like £5 a packet. Outrageous. I am not for the dismantling of public services but I think a dosage of private sector keeping costs down management will be of benefit to all concerned. How many paracetamol in the packet, what size and what strength? Is that the cost of the drugs, or the cost of dispensing the drug to patients in A+E or hospitals (when you figure in other costs). The private sector isn't as efficient as people tend to think either, and in many cases are a reason why government costs can be much higher. Government services will always cost more than the private counter parts, because the public will insist on higher standards in regards to operations and responsibility, which results in greater expenditure. I don't agree. Firstly the public, for the most part, wouldn't have a clue about quality or standards. The costs are higher because there's a chain of people/departments and pointless procedures invovled to do anything, which all add to costs. Whereas the private sector have to compete against others normally, resulting in lower costs. Not to mention being far more efficient, at anything. Personal experience. I've worked in contracts to government and private sector, private sector work has a lot less in the way of requirements, compared to government sector work. For example, there when providing IT into government sectors you have all manner of health and safety requirements that you just don't see in the private sector (such as RSI systems, Special Needs Software, higher data protection requirements, security protocols are higher, environmental systems requirements, more resilient DR and fallback plans, restricted infrastructure requirements are higher etc). You'll need to security clear staff to just be on site, which you almost never will for private sector contracts. Chances are you'll have restricted hardware limitations as well. Even requirements in regards to development, testing and QA is much higher when you're working with governments, as is auditing requirements. Defense is even more extreme in its standards and requirements. It all has to be recouped somehow, and invariably it costs more. It costs about 750-1000 per end user to provide a workstation to a government worker. Its about 500-750 in private sector. And the private sector worker will still have the better equipment at the end of the day. As I said it's the chain of pointless procedures and box ticking that means you pay more, for lower rather than higher standards. Not to mention the additional costs of someone else, ordering it, unwrapping it, setting it up etc. Not really, the two aren't really comparable. I remember being called into consult on a Lloyds project which was regularly blue screening users. They had the cheapest kit, worst processes and paid for the lowest quality service - because ultimately as long as they didn't lose the ATMs and basic service they didn't have a real problem (they could even resort to back ups). You don't get the same flexibility with a Government systems. You what? Large private sector can be easily as wasteful as public. Let's put it this way. An out of the box iPad, for example, will cost the public sector more per unit (with all associated costs) than it would in the private sector. Optimistic as ever
Alert a moderator to this post

Stuk

Top half 09 Dec 14 5.18pm

Quote jamiemartin721 at 09 Dec 2014 5.14pm

Quote Stuk at 09 Dec 2014 4.16pm

Quote jamiemartin721 at 09 Dec 2014 3.27pm

Quote Stuk at 08 Dec 2014 5.20pm

Quote jamiemartin721 at 08 Dec 2014 5.01pm

Quote matt_himself at 08 Dec 2014 4.55pm

Quote jamiemartin721 at 08 Dec 2014 4.46pm

I don't think people are against the idea of paying tax, rather they're more against the way in which its spent (or wasted) on things like vanity projects and political egotism.

Tax payers money is not just wasted on vanity projects and political egotism. It is wasted by those running public services. It has been proven that reducing public spending reduces waste and the waste that departments makes is criminal. Look at the recent news about the amount spent by the NHS on paracetamol. It was something like £5 a packet. Outrageous.

I am not for the dismantling of public services but I think a dosage of private sector keeping costs down management will be of benefit to all concerned.

How many paracetamol in the packet, what size and what strength? Is that the cost of the drugs, or the cost of dispensing the drug to patients in A+E or hospitals (when you figure in other costs).

The private sector isn't as efficient as people tend to think either, and in many cases are a reason why government costs can be much higher.

Government services will always cost more than the private counter parts, because the public will insist on higher standards in regards to operations and responsibility, which results in greater expenditure.

I don't agree. Firstly the public, for the most part, wouldn't have a clue about quality or standards. The costs are higher because there's a chain of people/departments and pointless procedures invovled to do anything, which all add to costs. Whereas the private sector have to compete against others normally, resulting in lower costs.

Not to mention being far more efficient, at anything.

Personal experience. I've worked in contracts to government and private sector, private sector work has a lot less in the way of requirements, compared to government sector work.

For example, there when providing IT into government sectors you have all manner of health and safety requirements that you just don't see in the private sector (such as RSI systems, Special Needs Software, higher data protection requirements, security protocols are higher, environmental systems requirements, more resilient DR and fallback plans, restricted infrastructure requirements are higher etc). You'll need to security clear staff to just be on site, which you almost never will for private sector contracts. Chances are you'll have restricted hardware limitations as well.

Even requirements in regards to development, testing and QA is much higher when you're working with governments, as is auditing requirements.

Defense is even more extreme in its standards and requirements.

It all has to be recouped somehow, and invariably it costs more.

It costs about 750-1000 per end user to provide a workstation to a government worker. Its about 500-750 in private sector.

And the private sector worker will still have the better equipment at the end of the day.

As I said it's the chain of pointless procedures and box ticking that means you pay more, for lower rather than higher standards. Not to mention the additional costs of someone else, ordering it, unwrapping it, setting it up etc.

Not really, the two aren't really comparable. I remember being called into consult on a Lloyds project which was regularly blue screening users. They had the cheapest kit, worst processes and paid for the lowest quality service - because ultimately as long as they didn't lose the ATMs and basic service they didn't have a real problem (they could even resort to back ups).

You don't get the same flexibility with a Government systems.

You what?

Large private sector can be easily as wasteful as public.

Let's put it this way. An out of the box iPad, for example, will cost the public sector more per unit (with all associated costs) than it would in the private sector.

Optimistic as ever

Alert a moderator to this post

Seth On a pale blue dot 09 Dec 14 5.29pm
Quote Stuk at 09 Dec 2014 5.12pm Quote Seth at 09 Dec 2014 4.50pm Quote Stuk at 09 Dec 2014 4.40pm Quote Seth at 09 Dec 2014 4.23pm Quote Superfly at 09 Dec 2014 4.15pm The NHS, im my very very recent experience, is in a shocking state & getting worse. I phoned to see my GP yesterday & was told they no longer take same day appointments. There is a same day walk in clinic from 2pm but they'll only see the first 18 people. I arrived at 1pm and the queue was out the door. I called again this morning to book a future appointment - the earliest they can book me in is the 24th December. My group practice has 9 GP's and I'm willing to see any of them. I'm going to have to join my work private health care. An action I despise as I don't see why I should when we have the NHS - but a 15 day wait for a doctors appointment is unacceptable. My GP practice is similar and cuts to GP's funding are to blame. This report is from last year so it's probably even worse than then: The GP system in England is facing a "catastrophe" because of cuts in funding, doctors' leaders are warning. Analysis by the Royal College of GPs suggests that over the past three years, investment in general practice has fallen by £400m in real terms. That is equivalent to a 7% cut in spending per patient, it says. [Link] It's been like this at GP surgeries for at least a decade. They have become so pointless that you need to second guess your illness in advance to see a GP. It's not funding, it's the ratio of doctors and surgeries to people, which gets worse by the day. My experience is that GP services have deteriorated dramatically over the last few years and the funding cuts over the same timescale are no coincidence. The report I linked to agrees and I'm inclined to believe the GP's. Mine has actually improved in the last couple of years, thanks to a new and larger practice but getting same day or next day appointments are still almost impossible. (That's with 100% patient flexibility OKnotOK.) I'm always less inclined to fully believe a report done by someone with a heavily vested interest in a certain outcome, rather than an independently found conclusion. Glad yours has improved. Mine hasn't, although they're making some changes just now which are meant to make things better. We'll see. You say vested interests, I say experience and expertise. Let's call the whole thing off. "You can feel the stadium jumping. The stadium is actually physically moving up and down" FA Cup MOTD 24/4/16
Alert a moderator to this post

Seth

On a pale blue dot 09 Dec 14 5.29pm

Quote Stuk at 09 Dec 2014 5.12pm

Quote Seth at 09 Dec 2014 4.50pm

Quote Stuk at 09 Dec 2014 4.40pm

Quote Seth at 09 Dec 2014 4.23pm

Quote Superfly at 09 Dec 2014 4.15pm

The NHS, im my very very recent experience, is in a shocking state & getting worse.

My group practice has 9 GP's and I'm willing to see any of them.

I'm going to have to join my work private health care. An action I despise as I don't see why I should when we have the NHS - but a 15 day wait for a doctors appointment is unacceptable.

My GP practice is similar and cuts to GP's funding are to blame. This report is from last year so it's probably even worse than then:

The GP system in England is facing a "catastrophe" because of cuts in funding, doctors' leaders are warning.

Analysis by the Royal College of GPs suggests that over the past three years, investment in general practice has fallen by £400m in real terms.

That is equivalent to a 7% cut in spending per patient, it says.

[Link]

It's been like this at GP surgeries for at least a decade. They have become so pointless that you need to second guess your illness in advance to see a GP.

It's not funding, it's the ratio of doctors and surgeries to people, which gets worse by the day.

My experience is that GP services have deteriorated dramatically over the last few years and the funding cuts over the same timescale are no coincidence.

The report I linked to agrees and I'm inclined to believe the GP's.

Mine has actually improved in the last couple of years, thanks to a new and larger practice but getting same day or next day appointments are still almost impossible. (That's with 100% patient flexibility OKnotOK.)

I'm always less inclined to fully believe a report done by someone with a heavily vested interest in a certain outcome, rather than an independently found conclusion.

Glad yours has improved. Mine hasn't, although they're making some changes just now which are meant to make things better. We'll see.

You say vested interests, I say experience and expertise. Let's call the whole thing off.

"You can feel the stadium jumping. The stadium is actually physically moving up and down"
FA Cup MOTD 24/4/16

Alert a moderator to this post

Seth On a pale blue dot 09 Dec 14 5.31pm
Quote Johnny Eagles at 09 Dec 2014 5.14pm Quote Seth at 09 Dec 2014 4.25pm Quote Stuk at 09 Dec 2014 4.21pm Quote Johnny Eagles at 09 Dec 2014 4.19pm The cynic in me makes me wonder if the people behind this study were keen on using it to bash the American healthcare system, which is a bit of a political hot potato over there. It crossed my mind while reading it too. I had a similar thought with Johnny's linked report, although from the opposite political perspective. What opposite political perspective is that then? The rabidly free-market Dutch and Danish healthcare industry?! I obviously didn't make myself clear. To repeat what I said to Stuk, I merely wondered if the report you quoted was politically motivated to bash the NHS. You say it's by one of the "leading providers of information about international healthcare" and I've accepted that. I was just saying I had my doubts when it was first posted, that's all. "You can feel the stadium jumping. The stadium is actually physically moving up and down" FA Cup MOTD 24/4/16
Alert a moderator to this post

Seth

On a pale blue dot 09 Dec 14 5.31pm

Quote Johnny Eagles at 09 Dec 2014 5.14pm

Quote Seth at 09 Dec 2014 4.25pm

Quote Stuk at 09 Dec 2014 4.21pm

Quote Johnny Eagles at 09 Dec 2014 4.19pm

The cynic in me makes me wonder if the people behind this study were keen on using it to bash the American healthcare system, which is a bit of a political hot potato over there.

It crossed my mind while reading it too.

I had a similar thought with Johnny's linked report, although from the opposite political perspective.

What opposite political perspective is that then?

The rabidly free-market Dutch and Danish healthcare industry?!

I obviously didn't make myself clear. To repeat what I said to Stuk, I merely wondered if the report you quoted was politically motivated to bash the NHS. You say it's by one of the "leading providers of information about international healthcare" and I've accepted that. I was just saying I had my doubts when it was first posted, that's all.

"You can feel the stadium jumping. The stadium is actually physically moving up and down"
FA Cup MOTD 24/4/16

Alert a moderator to this post

Seth On a pale blue dot 09 Dec 14 5.33pm
Quote Stuk at 09 Dec 2014 5.18pm Large private sector can be easily as wasteful as public. Let's put it this way. An out of the box iPad, for example, will cost the public sector more per unit (with all associated costs) than it would in the private sector. Isn't that because, as jamie said, the public sector has lots of side-issues to consider, like health & safety and other regulations, whereas the private sector basically only cares about profit? "You can feel the stadium jumping. The stadium is actually physically moving up and down" FA Cup MOTD 24/4/16
Alert a moderator to this post

Seth

On a pale blue dot 09 Dec 14 5.33pm

Quote Stuk at 09 Dec 2014 5.18pm

Large private sector can be easily as wasteful as public.

Let's put it this way. An out of the box iPad, for example, will cost the public sector more per unit (with all associated costs) than it would in the private sector.

Isn't that because, as jamie said, the public sector has lots of side-issues to consider, like health & safety and other regulations, whereas the private sector basically only cares about profit?

"You can feel the stadium jumping. The stadium is actually physically moving up and down"
FA Cup MOTD 24/4/16

Alert a moderator to this post

elgrande bedford 09 Dec 14 5.47pm
Quote Seth at 09 Dec 2014 4.50pm Quote Stuk at 09 Dec 2014 4.40pm Quote Seth at 09 Dec 2014 4.23pm Quote Superfly at 09 Dec 2014 4.15pm The NHS, im my very very recent experience, is in a shocking state & getting worse. I phoned to see my GP yesterday & was told they no longer take same day appointments. There is a same day walk in clinic from 2pm but they'll only see the first 18 people. I arrived at 1pm and the queue was out the door. I called again this morning to book a future appointment - the earliest they can book me in is the 24th December. My group practice has 9 GP's and I'm willing to see any of them. I'm going to have to join my work private health care. An action I despise as I don't see why I should when we have the NHS - but a 15 day wait for a doctors appointment is unacceptable. My GP practice is similar and cuts to GP's funding are to blame. This report is from last year so it's probably even worse than then: The GP system in England is facing a "catastrophe" because of cuts in funding, doctors' leaders are warning. Analysis by the Royal College of GPs suggests that over the past three years, investment in general practice has fallen by £400m in real terms. That is equivalent to a 7% cut in spending per patient, it says. [Link] It's been like this at GP surgeries for at least a decade. They have become so pointless that you need to second guess your illness in advance to see a GP. It's not funding, it's the ratio of doctors and surgeries to people, which gets worse by the day. My experience is that GP services have deteriorated dramatically over the last few years and the funding cuts over the same timescale are no coincidence. The report I linked to agrees and I'm inclined to believe the GP's. There's a surprise. always a Norwood boy, where ever I live.
Alert a moderator to this post

elgrande

bedford 09 Dec 14 5.47pm

Quote Seth at 09 Dec 2014 4.50pm

Quote Stuk at 09 Dec 2014 4.40pm

Quote Seth at 09 Dec 2014 4.23pm

Quote Superfly at 09 Dec 2014 4.15pm

The NHS, im my very very recent experience, is in a shocking state & getting worse.

My group practice has 9 GP's and I'm willing to see any of them.

I'm going to have to join my work private health care. An action I despise as I don't see why I should when we have the NHS - but a 15 day wait for a doctors appointment is unacceptable.

My GP practice is similar and cuts to GP's funding are to blame. This report is from last year so it's probably even worse than then:

The GP system in England is facing a "catastrophe" because of cuts in funding, doctors' leaders are warning.

Analysis by the Royal College of GPs suggests that over the past three years, investment in general practice has fallen by £400m in real terms.

That is equivalent to a 7% cut in spending per patient, it says.

[Link]

It's been like this at GP surgeries for at least a decade. They have become so pointless that you need to second guess your illness in advance to see a GP.

It's not funding, it's the ratio of doctors and surgeries to people, which gets worse by the day.

My experience is that GP services have deteriorated dramatically over the last few years and the funding cuts over the same timescale are no coincidence.

The report I linked to agrees and I'm inclined to believe the GP's.

There's a surprise.

always a Norwood boy, where ever I live.

Alert a moderator to this post

laddo london 09 Dec 14 6.03pm
Quote matt_himself at 06 Dec 2014 7.52am Oh dear. Br*ghton Council is riven by bickering and divides in the ruling Green administration. Refuse workers going on strike. Huge council tax rises. [Link] How can they be trusted to run anything? Historically all the main political parties have fcuked up a council. Do we write them off too? The Greens are the to the left what UKIP are to the right. It's why it is such a scandal that they have not been invited to live television debates ahead of the general election. In the interests of democracy they have to be. laddo "People say, live fast, die young. I say live fast, die old. That's me, the non-conformist". David Brent.
Alert a moderator to this post

laddo

london 09 Dec 14 6.03pm

Quote matt_himself at 06 Dec 2014 7.52am

Oh dear. Br*ghton Council is riven by bickering and divides in the ruling Green administration. Refuse workers going on strike. Huge council tax rises.

[Link]

How can they be trusted to run anything?

Historically all the main political parties have fcuked up a council. Do we write them off too?

The Greens are the to the left what UKIP are to the right. It's why it is such a scandal that they have not been invited to live television debates ahead of the general election. In the interests of democracy they have to be.

laddo

"People say, live fast, die young. I say live fast, die old. That's me, the non-conformist".
David Brent.

Alert a moderator to this post

Johnny Eagles berlin 09 Dec 14 6.07pm
Quote Seth at 09 Dec 2014 5.33pm Quote Stuk at 09 Dec 2014 5.18pm Large private sector can be easily as wasteful as public. Let's put it this way. An out of the box iPad, for example, will cost the public sector more per unit (with all associated costs) than it would in the private sector. Isn't that because, as jamie said, the public sector has lots of side-issues to consider, like health & safety and other regulations, whereas the private sector basically only cares about profit? What has health and safety got to do with buying ipads? I agree with Stu that large private sector can be as wasteful as the public sector. When large private sector is doing what realy ought to be the public sector's job for it (eg, railways, prison security) it can be even more wasteful not to say inept. But there are lots of reasons why the public sector is usually more wasteful, the main one usually being that it's not their own money they're spending. I can think of lots of examples I've come across but my favourite is probably on the radio 4 documentary they did about the public sector strike in 2011. Interviewing someone who was helping with the strike they asked if it was hard work. "Yeah," she replied, "we're working absolutely flat out." And without a hint of irony she added, we're pulling eight, nine hour days here." ...we must expand...get more pupils...so that the knowledge will spread...
Alert a moderator to this post

Johnny Eagles

berlin 09 Dec 14 6.07pm

Quote Seth at 09 Dec 2014 5.33pm

Quote Stuk at 09 Dec 2014 5.18pm

Large private sector can be easily as wasteful as public.

Let's put it this way. An out of the box iPad, for example, will cost the public sector more per unit (with all associated costs) than it would in the private sector.

Isn't that because, as jamie said, the public sector has lots of side-issues to consider, like health & safety and other regulations, whereas the private sector basically only cares about profit?

What has health and safety got to do with buying ipads?

I agree with Stu that large private sector can be as wasteful as the public sector. When large private sector is doing what realy ought to be the public sector's job for it (eg, railways, prison security) it can be even more wasteful not to say inept.

But there are lots of reasons why the public sector is usually more wasteful, the main one usually being that it's not their own money they're spending.

I can think of lots of examples I've come across but my favourite is probably on the radio 4 documentary they did about the public sector strike in 2011.

Interviewing someone who was helping with the strike they asked if it was hard work. "Yeah," she replied, "we're working absolutely flat out." And without a hint of irony she added, we're pulling eight, nine hour days here."

...we must expand...get more pupils...so that the knowledge will spread...

Alert a moderator to this post

Stuk Top half 09 Dec 14 8.11pm
Quote Seth at 09 Dec 2014 5.33pm Quote Stuk at 09 Dec 2014 5.18pm Large private sector can be easily as wasteful as public. Let's put it this way. An out of the box iPad, for example, will cost the public sector more per unit (with all associated costs) than it would in the private sector. Isn't that because, as jamie said, the public sector has lots of side-issues to consider, like health & safety and other regulations, whereas the private sector basically only cares about profit? I wish. H&S, amongst other regs, still apply just as much, they're just dumped on someone else's workload and the costs absorbed. Rather than a whole new department being employed, who then almost actively work against everyone else they are supposed to work with. Optimistic as ever
Alert a moderator to this post

Stuk

Top half 09 Dec 14 8.11pm

Quote Seth at 09 Dec 2014 5.33pm

Quote Stuk at 09 Dec 2014 5.18pm

Large private sector can be easily as wasteful as public.

Let's put it this way. An out of the box iPad, for example, will cost the public sector more per unit (with all associated costs) than it would in the private sector.

Isn't that because, as jamie said, the public sector has lots of side-issues to consider, like health & safety and other regulations, whereas the private sector basically only cares about profit?

I wish. H&S, amongst other regs, still apply just as much, they're just dumped on someone else's workload and the costs absorbed. Rather than a whole new department being employed, who then almost actively work against everyone else they are supposed to work with.

Optimistic as ever

Alert a moderator to this post

Seth On a pale blue dot 10 Dec 14 4.41pm
Back on topic, membership of the Green Party has more than doubled since the start of this year: Membership of the Green Party has doubled in England and Wales since the start of the year – hitting almost 28,000. Party leader Natalie Bennett has hailed the swelling of its ranks as proof that voters will reject “business as usual” at next year’s general election. The environmentalist party currently has 27,618 members – more than half the total of the Liberal Democrats, whom it has overtaken in a number of recent by-elections and opinion polls. It gained an extra 500 members following a strong performance on BBC Radio 4 Any Questions, the Guardian reported. [Link] "You can feel the stadium jumping. The stadium is actually physically moving up and down" FA Cup MOTD 24/4/16
Alert a moderator to this post

Seth

On a pale blue dot 10 Dec 14 4.41pm

Back on topic, membership of the Green Party has more than doubled since the start of this year:

Membership of the Green Party has doubled in England and Wales since the start of the year – hitting almost 28,000.

Party leader Natalie Bennett has hailed the swelling of its ranks as proof that voters will reject “business as usual” at next year’s general election.

The environmentalist party currently has 27,618 members – more than half the total of the Liberal Democrats, whom it has overtaken in a number of recent by-elections and opinion polls.

It gained an extra 500 members following a strong performance on BBC Radio 4 Any Questions, the Guardian reported.

[Link]

"You can feel the stadium jumping. The stadium is actually physically moving up and down"
FA Cup MOTD 24/4/16

Alert a moderator to this post

jamiemartin721 Reading 10 Dec 14 4.48pm
Quote Stuk at 09 Dec 2014 5.15pm Quote jamiemartin721 at 09 Dec 2014 4.54pm Quote Stuk at 09 Dec 2014 4.40pm Quote Seth at 09 Dec 2014 4.23pm Quote Superfly at 09 Dec 2014 4.15pm The NHS, im my very very recent experience, is in a shocking state & getting worse. I phoned to see my GP yesterday & was told they no longer take same day appointments. There is a same day walk in clinic from 2pm but they'll only see the first 18 people. I arrived at 1pm and the queue was out the door. I called again this morning to book a future appointment - the earliest they can book me in is the 24th December. My group practice has 9 GP's and I'm willing to see any of them. I'm going to have to join my work private health care. An action I despise as I don't see why I should when we have the NHS - but a 15 day wait for a doctors appointment is unacceptable. My GP practice is similar and cuts to GP's funding are to blame. This report is from last year so it's probably even worse than then: The GP system in England is facing a "catastrophe" because of cuts in funding, doctors' leaders are warning. Analysis by the Royal College of GPs suggests that over the past three years, investment in general practice has fallen by £400m in real terms. That is equivalent to a 7% cut in spending per patient, it says. [Link] It's been like this at GP surgeries for at least a decade. They have become so pointless that you need to second guess your illness in advance to see a GP. It's not funding, it's the ratio of doctors and surgeries to people, which gets worse by the day. Arguably that's funding, if they're aren't enough GPs to go around and increasingly less incentives to work in the NHS as a GP. Arguably it's also population increase and population density. Isn't that a funding issue though - not increasing the budgets sufficiently to cope with population increase and density. I know the conservative / right wing generally operate on a basis that 'cuts' will have no impact, as they just trim the fat etc but of course realistically if you have the same budget and a larger customer base you've essentially had a cut in funding, the same as if you have less to do the same. "One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" [Link]
Alert a moderator to this post

jamiemartin721

Reading 10 Dec 14 4.48pm

Quote Stuk at 09 Dec 2014 5.15pm

Quote jamiemartin721 at 09 Dec 2014 4.54pm

Quote Stuk at 09 Dec 2014 4.40pm

Quote Seth at 09 Dec 2014 4.23pm

Quote Superfly at 09 Dec 2014 4.15pm

The NHS, im my very very recent experience, is in a shocking state & getting worse.

My group practice has 9 GP's and I'm willing to see any of them.

I'm going to have to join my work private health care. An action I despise as I don't see why I should when we have the NHS - but a 15 day wait for a doctors appointment is unacceptable.

My GP practice is similar and cuts to GP's funding are to blame. This report is from last year so it's probably even worse than then:

The GP system in England is facing a "catastrophe" because of cuts in funding, doctors' leaders are warning.

Analysis by the Royal College of GPs suggests that over the past three years, investment in general practice has fallen by £400m in real terms.

That is equivalent to a 7% cut in spending per patient, it says.

[Link]

It's been like this at GP surgeries for at least a decade. They have become so pointless that you need to second guess your illness in advance to see a GP.

It's not funding, it's the ratio of doctors and surgeries to people, which gets worse by the day.

Arguably that's funding, if they're aren't enough GPs to go around and increasingly less incentives to work in the NHS as a GP.

Arguably it's also population increase and population density.

Isn't that a funding issue though - not increasing the budgets sufficiently to cope with population increase and density.

I know the conservative / right wing generally operate on a basis that 'cuts' will have no impact, as they just trim the fat etc but of course realistically if you have the same budget and a larger customer base you've essentially had a cut in funding, the same as if you have less to do the same.

"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug"
[Link]

Alert a moderator to this post

Seth On a pale blue dot 11 Dec 14 5.25pm
Latest tracking poll puts the Greens in 4th place: [Link] "You can feel the stadium jumping. The stadium is actually physically moving up and down" FA Cup MOTD 24/4/16
Alert a moderator to this post

Seth

On a pale blue dot 11 Dec 14 5.25pm

Latest tracking poll puts the Greens in 4th place:

[Link]

"You can feel the stadium jumping. The stadium is actually physically moving up and down"
FA Cup MOTD 24/4/16

Alert a moderator to this post

Page 9 of 34 < 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 >

Previous Topic | Next Topic

Crystal Palace FC Supporters' Website - The Holmesdale Online

The Greens

Site Map

New users

Existing users

Sponsors