blonde poker forum
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
April 28, 2024, 08:45:19 AM

Login with username, password and session length
Search:     Advanced search
2272618 Posts in 66755 Topics by 16946 Members
Latest Member: KobeTaylor
* Home Help Arcade Search Calendar Guidelines Login Register
+  blonde poker forum
|-+  Community Forums
| |-+  The Lounge
| | |-+  The UK Politics and EU Referendum thread - merged
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic. « previous next »
Poll
Question: How will you vote on December 12th 2019
Conservative - 19 (33.9%)
Labour - 12 (21.4%)
SNP - 2 (3.6%)
Lib Dem - 8 (14.3%)
Brexit - 1 (1.8%)
Green - 6 (10.7%)
Other - 2 (3.6%)
Spoil - 0 (0%)
Not voting - 6 (10.7%)
Total Voters: 55

Pages: 1 ... 116 117 118 119 [120] 121 122 123 124 ... 1533 Go Down Print
Author Topic: The UK Politics and EU Referendum thread - merged  (Read 2198023 times)
DungBeetle
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4925


View Profile
« Reply #1785 on: January 25, 2016, 03:07:36 PM »

Does anyone check "Roboto-san"s work before we get discharged and start taking oestrogen boosters?
Logged
RickBFA
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2001


View Profile
« Reply #1786 on: January 25, 2016, 03:13:54 PM »

Does anyone check "Roboto-san"s work before we get discharged and start taking oestrogen boosters?

I presume with the system I saw on the BBC report there will be safety checks built into the system.
Logged
DMorgan
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4449



View Profile
« Reply #1787 on: January 25, 2016, 08:23:41 PM »

This seems like incredibly shady behaviour

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/government-loses-vote-to-keep-child-poverty-numbers-secret-a6833156.html

More of Camerons campaign to airbrush away 'in work poverty'?
Logged

DungBeetle
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4925


View Profile
« Reply #1788 on: January 26, 2016, 08:32:07 AM »

This seems like incredibly shady behaviour

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/government-loses-vote-to-keep-child-poverty-numbers-secret-a6833156.html

More of Camerons campaign to airbrush away 'in work poverty'?

From reading Owen Smith's comments it is relative poverty they are talking about.  If so the usefulness of the measure is a debate worth having and not shady behaviour.  The problem is people mis use the term, dropping the term "relative" to make their political points.  See some of the other quotes in the piece for how some have twisted it for their own ends.

I don't mind the measure being used as long as people don't try to pretend it shows something it doesn't.
Logged
PokerBroker
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1189



View Profile
« Reply #1789 on: January 26, 2016, 01:21:38 PM »

Interesting this and don't mean to offend anyone who has had to sit with a relative being discharged..but is it really so bad that people being discharged (by definition non urgent) have to wait behind (possibly) more urgent deliveries/cases.


That is certainly not the direction I am coming with on this front.   I get the impression we are all in agreement that this is a strain on resources/bed blocking. 

I would say that once someone has been given the all clear to leave that should not be delayed by any sort of emergency?  Would it not be the case that emergency doctors etc would be based at casualty and unlikely that it would be the job of a consultant to deliver medication and authorise the discharge. 
Logged
nirvana
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7804



View Profile
« Reply #1790 on: January 26, 2016, 02:04:50 PM »

Interesting this and don't mean to offend anyone who has had to sit with a relative being discharged..but is it really so bad that people being discharged (by definition non urgent) have to wait behind (possibly) more urgent deliveries/cases.


That is certainly not the direction I am coming with on this front.   I get the impression we are all in agreement that this is a strain on resources/bed blocking. 

I would say that once someone has been given the all clear to leave that should not be delayed by any sort of emergency?  Would it not be the case that emergency doctors etc would be based at casualty and unlikely that it would be the job of a consultant to deliver medication and authorise the discharge. 

Neither here nor there really but a bed being free doesn't mean someone on a trolley auto takes it. And a situation doesn't have to be an emergency to be more urgent. My only real assertion is that it's far from simple to resolve and improve and I probably think bed occupancy and wait times  are far less important issue than clinical outcomes for the whole hospitalised population
Logged

sola virtus nobilitat
Doobs
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 16577


View Profile
« Reply #1791 on: January 26, 2016, 02:39:07 PM »

I probably have at least as much experience as most on privatisation in the NHS.

My first daughter was bron in a typical old London hospital.  The whole experience was awful.  The ward was very understaffed and it seemed very chaotic.  My wife got no attention at all for several hours whilst in labour.  They wouldn't let me in the hospital during this period, as she wasn't sufficiently in labour for me to be allowed in/  Because she picked up an infection in the hospital, she ended up spending 2 weeks in that maternity ward.  It never really improved.  Me and my mum helped several other women whilst there, as they cries for help were ignored.  They were expected to get up out if bed and order their food in the corridor. How they were expected to do this, whilst drugged up and after caesarians was never explained.  Getting anybody's attention seemed to be a continuing battle for all the new mums in there.

My second child was born in Hinchingbrooke hospital, which at the time was under the management of Circle.  The experience was entirely different.   She got attention whenever she needed, the staff were always helpful.  My children went there a few times after this birth and I never had any complaints at any time with any treatment, including when one had to stay in overnight when seriously ill.  I never saw anything that would concern me.  

The second hospital reduced its defecit annually whilst circle was in charge and the whole place seemed to be improving all the time Circle were there.

The second hospital was subject to fines and eventually put under special measures as it was "failing" so badly.  These in combination seemed to push Hincingbrooke over the edge and Circle walked away.

I have seen the CQC report into Hinchingbrooke and it was as if it was talking about a hospital that I had never been to.    

Since Circle has walked away, CQC has backtracked enormously on its previous report as you can see here.

http://www.healthinvestor.co.uk/ShowArticle.aspx?ID=4032

and here

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cambridgeshire-31109331


“Since our inspection, the CQC have changed their conflict of interest policy, changed the guidance for inspected hospitals, changed the publication process, retracted many serious allegations, and confirmed that they didn’t actually witness any harm to patients. They now appear to have changed the overall rating. That’s a victory, but it calls into question the credibility of the entire inspection.
“Hinchingbrooke was the same hospital, run the same way, with Circle still in charge during both inspections. Yet in the new report the majority of 33 individual ratings are ‘good’ and just one is now 'inadequate'.
“This second report is based on an inspection carried out before the CQC’s first report. We simply cannot understand why they published a critical report after an inspection that showed a different result.

“This was deeply misleading to patients, and will inflame the sense of injustice we know many Hinchingbrooke staff feel.”


This is a hospital where in the press bumf connected to the original report Fiona Allinson, who was head of hospital inspection told the CQC board meeting "It was one of the worst inspections that I had ever been to. I drove home and wanted to drive back again with my nurse's uniform on to sort it out."

By contrast Dr Suzanne Hamilton, chair of the Medical Advisory Committee at the hospital wrote to the local paper to say that the CQC report was not consistent with "the vast reams of verified statistical data" about the hospital.

The whole episode left a very bad taste in my mouth, but unfortunately even those on the right see it as something as an embarassment, so we are left with a narrative that the whole Circle management of Hinchingbrooke failed horribly.   Whilst there were failings on the way, there is clearly a lot that can be learned from the whole episode and hopefully the NHS will learn those lessons.

In the time before Circle took over Hinchingbrooke was failing horribly and was very much under the threat of closure with an enormous deficit. If it wasn't the worst performing hospital financially in the whole country it was very close to it.

Fiona Allinson is still in her role at the CQC.
Logged

Most of the bets placed so far seem more like hopeful punts rather than value spots
DungBeetle
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4925


View Profile
« Reply #1792 on: January 26, 2016, 03:14:33 PM »

"Fiona Allinson is still in her role at the CQC."

The complete lack of accountability is disgraceful.
Logged
RickBFA
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2001


View Profile
« Reply #1793 on: January 26, 2016, 04:02:10 PM »

Interesting this and don't mean to offend anyone who has had to sit with a relative being discharged..but is it really so bad that people being discharged (by definition non urgent) have to wait behind (possibly) more urgent deliveries/cases.


That is certainly not the direction I am coming with on this front.   I get the impression we are all in agreement that this is a strain on resources/bed blocking. 

I would say that once someone has been given the all clear to leave that should not be delayed by any sort of emergency?  Would it not be the case that emergency doctors etc would be based at casualty and unlikely that it would be the job of a consultant to deliver medication and authorise the discharge. 

Neither here nor there really but a bed being free doesn't mean someone on a trolley auto takes it. And a situation doesn't have to be an emergency to be more urgent. My only real assertion is that it's far from simple to resolve and improve and I probably think bed occupancy and wait times  are far less important issue than clinical outcomes for the whole hospitalised population

Don't really agree with this. The lack of beds is going to have an effect on outcomes. That was very clear from the investigation I was listening to.

The BBC programme was using the heart attack chap as an example of how bed blocking can directly affect clinical outcomes and overall quality of care/treatment.

The medical experts on there were basically saying his care would have been better on a specialist ward rather than sat on a trolley (linked to a heart monitor) in A&E for 24 hours plus.

If there is a bed blocked on a ward dealing with that issue then it clearly directly impacted on the patient in this example.

It seems basic logic to invest some time and resources into these types of issues to get maximum usage and efficiency, doesn't it?
Logged
Longines
Gamesmaster
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3798


View Profile
« Reply #1794 on: January 26, 2016, 04:04:20 PM »

One of the challenges is that everyone has some interaction with the NHS to a great or lesser degree and think that can be extrapolated across the entire organisation - it is ridiculously huge.

- My son did a year as a health care assistant in his gap year and his stories tie in exactly with the earlier posts regarding bed blocking.

- I have contact lenses supplied by the NHS. They cost ££££ but I only have to contribute a small amount towards them. If I wore glasses they would cost several hundred pounds and the NHS would contribute £15. As someone who could afford to pay the full price for the contacts why aren't they means tested?
Logged
nirvana
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7804



View Profile
« Reply #1795 on: January 26, 2016, 08:17:26 PM »

Interesting this and don't mean to offend anyone who has had to sit with a relative being discharged..but is it really so bad that people being discharged (by definition non urgent) have to wait behind (possibly) more urgent deliveries/cases.


That is certainly not the direction I am coming with on this front.   I get the impression we are all in agreement that this is a strain on resources/bed blocking. 

I would say that once someone has been given the all clear to leave that should not be delayed by any sort of emergency?  Would it not be the case that emergency doctors etc would be based at casualty and unlikely that it would be the job of a consultant to deliver medication and authorise the discharge. 

Neither here nor there really but a bed being free doesn't mean someone on a trolley auto takes it. And a situation doesn't have to be an emergency to be more urgent. My only real assertion is that it's far from simple to resolve and improve and I probably think bed occupancy and wait times  are far less important issue than clinical outcomes for the whole hospitalised population

Don't really agree with this. The lack of beds is going to have an effect on outcomes. That was very clear from the investigation I was listening to.

The BBC programme was using the heart attack chap as an example of how bed blocking can directly affect clinical outcomes and overall quality of care/treatment.

The medical experts on there were basically saying his care would have been better on a specialist ward rather than sat on a trolley (linked to a heart monitor) in A&E for 24 hours plus.

If there is a bed blocked on a ward dealing with that issue then it clearly directly impacted on the patient in this example.

It seems basic logic to invest some time and resources into these types of issues to get maximum usage and efficiency, doesn't it?

I agree but I guess my overall thoughts are sub it out to specialist smaller units catering efficiently for specific needs or add more beds. Expecting that we'll happen on a way to use the current number of beds, in the current environments, with the current staff levels, more efficiently is forlorn I think. If the massive increase in spending and staff levels and management over the last 10 years hasn't solved it I don't see what is readily likely to - I guess I just think more fundamental reforms than hoped for efficiencies are needed. And the shibboleths that keep the NHS as one gigantic entity mitigate against real improvement - just an opinion, no strong philosophical beliefs about it.
Logged

sola virtus nobilitat
MintTrav
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3401


View Profile
« Reply #1796 on: January 27, 2016, 06:33:33 PM »

So it's not just Corbyn who can come out with the wrong wording. Cameron is getting it in the neck, not just from Corbyn's gang, but also the likes of Yvette Cooper and Chuka Umunna, for calling refugees a 'bunch of migrants'. Surely it was a slip, not a planned expression?
Logged
TightEnd
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: I am a geek!!



View Profile
« Reply #1797 on: January 27, 2016, 06:38:05 PM »

So it's not just Corbyn who can come out with the wrong wording. Cameron is getting it in the neck, not just from Corbyn's gang, but also the likes of Yvette Cooper and Chuka Umunna, for calling refugees a 'bunch of migrants'. Surely it was a slip, not a planned expression?

it was a slip in the midst of a go at Corbyn but unimpressive nonetheless. Often one's true thoughts on a subject can be gleaned when our guard is down

these PMQs follow a familiar pattern, Corbyn fails to land any punches then Cameron gets over-excited when going on the attack and blunders/slips up
Logged

My eyes are open wide
By the way,I made it through the day
I watch the world outside
By the way, I'm leaving out today
Woodsey
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 15846



View Profile
« Reply #1798 on: January 27, 2016, 10:28:54 PM »

Fucks sake hope this doesn't happen, that will totally balls up my 10 year plan  Cry

May as well go and do some shite lower paid job with less hassle....

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/pensions/12115198/52-days-left-of-66pc-pension-tax-relief-boost-This-is-what-you-need-to-do.html
Logged
DaveShoelace
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 9168



View Profile WWW
« Reply #1799 on: January 27, 2016, 10:37:47 PM »

Fucks sake hope this doesn't happen, that will totally balls up my 10 year plan  Cry

May as well go and do some shite lower paid job with less hassle....

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/pensions/12115198/52-days-left-of-66pc-pension-tax-relief-boost-This-is-what-you-need-to-do.html

That potentially could really fuck up the personal pensions industry, the tax relief is the best thing about it.

I think if they do this, what they'll use as their go to response is that most workers will be better off because the new workplace pensions scheme encourages employers to make payments.

Obv I'll reserve judgement to see what this 'pension-isa' thingy is all about, but seems terrible to me.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 116 117 118 119 [120] 121 122 123 124 ... 1533 Go Up Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.311 seconds with 22 queries.