Tuesday 8th January 2019
Posted: Tue 08 Jan, 2019 7:04 am
Morning all.
Excellent.NHS leaders want Theresa May to scrap Conservative legislation that forces the tendering of contracts for care, in a move which could dramatically reduce privatisation of key health services.
In the latest long-term plan, which maps out the NHS’s future over the next 10 years, Simon Stevens, the chief executive of NHS England, demands that the prime minister repeals significant key sections of the Health and Social Care Act 2012.
The document, which Downing Street has endorsed, warns that the legislation, which was pushed through by the then health secretary, Andrew Lansley, despite huge opposition, is damaging the NHS and stopping it from making vital improvements to the care patients receive. It outlines how Lansley’s shake-up has damaged the NHS, which May has previously acknowledged.
There you go - easy-peasy, just switch to an insurance scheme and outcomes automatically improve!IEA
Verified account
@iealondon
Follow Follow @iealondon
More
"No consideration has been given to learning from the Social Health Insurance systems in Europe, under which thousands more people survive strokes and common types of cancer each year." says the IEA's @KateAndrs. #NHSLongTermPlan https://iea.org.uk/media/nhs-long-term- ... -outcomes/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; …
Given that a thug murdering an MP wasn't enough to stop the last referendum I'm not entirely convinced by this argument.gilsey wrote:Thread.
" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Chris Kendall
@ottocrat
Following Following @ottocrat
More
Government ministers and apologists saying a referendum should not happen because thugs abused an MP, well done, you’ve just shown those thugs that their approach works and given our democracy and rule of law a(nother) kick in the nuts.
That's absolutely right, the British neoliberals have always looked to the US for a model of health care, which is why it scares the shit out of the rest of us.RogerOThornhill wrote: "No consideration has been given to learning from the Social Health Insurance systems in Europe"
Thanks WillowWillow904 wrote:@PaulfromYorkshire
The Common Market 2.0 you posted yesterday is what I would call a single market compromise position. I think it would be a good approach, and I would support something like it but Labour is so far from such a position at the moment that I struggle to see how we get there, and that's before you even consider that the Tories are in charge anyway. Because no one has managed to really push soft Brexit effectively, the call for a further referendum seems to have won the support of those remain inclined voters who may otherwise have been inclined to support a soft Brexit. Far from finding a consensus somewhere in the middle, we seem to be polarizing to the extremes of leaving with no deal or a "people's vote" with the express intention of not leaving at all. I think we have similar ideas of where we think would be a good place to end up, I just have a lot less confidence than you that the Labour leadership are anywhere near the same page, let alone would be able to find a way to get there. May's WA actually pushes us a little in that direction, which is why it's so unpopular with her own side. For me, rejecting the WA will represent a further distancing of our relationship with the EU which will take a lot of work to mend. Needless to say, it's hard to influence such things from opposition, but I've been disappointed that Corbyn has so consistently echoed May's red line of needing to leave the single market to fulfil the referendum mandate. It makes it much harder to achieve a soft Brexit.
Well I suppose he may have changed his mind, but Corbyn in the past has been more in the Rees-Mogg camp of insisting that remaining in the single market wouldn't respect the referendum result, so although it is certainly possible the Labour leadership may end up coming behind soft Brexit, it certainly doesn't feel like something they are trying very hard to persuade voters to support, at least not so far. Your optimism is preferable to my scepticism, however, so I'll just say you're right!PaulfromYorkshire wrote:Thanks WillowWillow904 wrote:@PaulfromYorkshire
The Common Market 2.0 you posted yesterday is what I would call a single market compromise position. I think it would be a good approach, and I would support something like it but Labour is so far from such a position at the moment that I struggle to see how we get there, and that's before you even consider that the Tories are in charge anyway. Because no one has managed to really push soft Brexit effectively, the call for a further referendum seems to have won the support of those remain inclined voters who may otherwise have been inclined to support a soft Brexit. Far from finding a consensus somewhere in the middle, we seem to be polarizing to the extremes of leaving with no deal or a "people's vote" with the express intention of not leaving at all. I think we have similar ideas of where we think would be a good place to end up, I just have a lot less confidence than you that the Labour leadership are anywhere near the same page, let alone would be able to find a way to get there. May's WA actually pushes us a little in that direction, which is why it's so unpopular with her own side. For me, rejecting the WA will represent a further distancing of our relationship with the EU which will take a lot of work to mend. Needless to say, it's hard to influence such things from opposition, but I've been disappointed that Corbyn has so consistently echoed May's red line of needing to leave the single market to fulfil the referendum mandate. It makes it much harder to achieve a soft Brexit.
Interestingly, you will have noticed Powell and Halfon's approach being to vote down the Deal on the basis of the political agreement not the WA.
Presumably Common Market 2.0 pretty much meets Starmer's six tests.
It also respects the result of the Referendum (though Rees-Mogg etc. won't agree with that).
So, quite easy for the Labour leadership to line up behind I'd have thought.
Willow904 wrote:Well I suppose he may have changed his mind, but Corbyn in the past has been more in the Rees-Mogg camp of insisting that remaining in the single market wouldn't respect the referendum result, so although it is certainly possible the Labour leadership may end up coming behind soft Brexit, it certainly doesn't feel like something they are trying very hard to persuade voters to support, at least not so far. Your optimism is preferable to my scepticism, however, so I'll just say you're right!PaulfromYorkshire wrote:Thanks WillowWillow904 wrote:@PaulfromYorkshire
The Common Market 2.0 you posted yesterday is what I would call a single market compromise position. I think it would be a good approach, and I would support something like it but Labour is so far from such a position at the moment that I struggle to see how we get there, and that's before you even consider that the Tories are in charge anyway. Because no one has managed to really push soft Brexit effectively, the call for a further referendum seems to have won the support of those remain inclined voters who may otherwise have been inclined to support a soft Brexit. Far from finding a consensus somewhere in the middle, we seem to be polarizing to the extremes of leaving with no deal or a "people's vote" with the express intention of not leaving at all. I think we have similar ideas of where we think would be a good place to end up, I just have a lot less confidence than you that the Labour leadership are anywhere near the same page, let alone would be able to find a way to get there. May's WA actually pushes us a little in that direction, which is why it's so unpopular with her own side. For me, rejecting the WA will represent a further distancing of our relationship with the EU which will take a lot of work to mend. Needless to say, it's hard to influence such things from opposition, but I've been disappointed that Corbyn has so consistently echoed May's red line of needing to leave the single market to fulfil the referendum mandate. It makes it much harder to achieve a soft Brexit.
Interestingly, you will have noticed Powell and Halfon's approach being to vote down the Deal on the basis of the political agreement not the WA.
Presumably Common Market 2.0 pretty much meets Starmer's six tests.
It also respects the result of the Referendum (though Rees-Mogg etc. won't agree with that).
So, quite easy for the Labour leadership to line up behind I'd have thought.
This is a big deal. It's one more thing directly impacting most people in the UK. Some have wealth enough riding out current market catastrophes but most people can't afford a series of price spikes without negative consequences. Pinched and meager living due to a ruling government's jackass economic philosophy is crap.The collapse matters to more than just the firm’s customers, as all households bear the cost for moving customers from failed firms to other suppliers.Ofgem urges customers to take meter readings after ninth small UK supplier goes bust in a year
https://www.theguardian.com/business/20 ... -the-lurch" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
A Guardian analysis found that, before Economy Energy, consumers already faced a bill of at least £80m from other failed gas and electricity suppliers.
Do you think May might take the vote off the agenda again?AnatolyKasparov wrote:Yep, assuming next Tuesday's vote goes against the PM then various strategies become possible.
HindleA wrote:https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... ers-brexit
Lorrie Moore wrote:“You have a choice," she told the class. "The whorish emptiness of lies or the straightlaced horrors of truth.”
Anagrams
HindleA wrote:https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... ers-brexit
Can you imagine what we'd be saying if we were staying and another country had chosen to leave? Of course we'd be really nice to them, not like that nasty EU.he voted remain in the referendum but has now changed his mind. “I would vote to leave now because the way the EU has treated the UK on its exit has opened my eyes up a little bit.
I'm really struggling to see what's so unfair about expecting us to pay Nigel Farage's pension, let alone expecting us to respect the Good Friday Agreement. I'm starting to feel like I live in another universe rather than just a different part of the country.gilsey wrote:HindleA wrote:https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... ers-brexitCan you imagine what we'd be saying if we were staying and another country had chosen to leave? Of course we'd be really nice to them, not like that nasty EU.he voted remain in the referendum but has now changed his mind. “I would vote to leave now because the way the EU has treated the UK on its exit has opened my eyes up a little bit.
Not if she wants a WA ratified in time for 29th March. Postpone it again and there's no point having a vote on the WA at all, you may as well movie straight on to plan B. (Whatever that might be).citizenJA wrote:Do you think May might take the vote off the agenda again?AnatolyKasparov wrote:Yep, assuming next Tuesday's vote goes against the PM then various strategies become possible.
In that event I would expect the opposition to move a no confidence vote, with considerable justification.citizenJA wrote:Do you think May might take the vote off the agenda again?AnatolyKasparov wrote:Yep, assuming next Tuesday's vote goes against the PM then various strategies become possible.
This is the "Cooper amendment", presumably?PorFavor wrote:Yes 303
No 296
Government loss.
Yes. Sorry about that!AnatolyKasparov wrote:This is the "Cooper amendment", presumably?PorFavor wrote:Yes 303
No 296
Government loss.