Labour: NHS would be left 'unrecognisable' under Tories

[super jumbe]

The NHS in England will be left "unrecognisable" if the Conservatives are in government after the general election, Labour has claimed.

In a "start of the race" note to activists, Labour's election strategy chief Douglas Alexander calls for a campaign to "save" the health service.

The document claims waiting time rules have been breached and says there is a "staffing crisis" in the NHS.

Meanwhile, the Tories have targeted Labour over cutting the deficit.

Prime Minister David Cameron said Labour would spend an extra ?13.5bn on debt interest because of a reluctance to cut spending as quickly as his party would.

'Future risks'
In an interview with The Sunday Times, he said: "There is nothing caring about the risks Labour would take with the economy and all our futures."

But Labour said the figures were based on "false assumptions and out-of-date economic forecasts".

BBC political correspondent Chris Mason said general election campaigning was stepping up, with MPs returning to the House of Commons on Monday.



In the Labour document on the NHS, the party claimed seven of out 15 patients' rights enshrined in the health service's constitution have been breached.

They include maximum waiting times of four hours at accident and emergency, 62 days for cancer treatment, and six weeks for diagnostic tests.

The party also claimed it had become harder to book a doctor's appointment.

It argued the problem could get worse if "service standards continue to decline" under a Conservative government, with waiting lists reaching four million.

Almost two million patients would need to wait more than four hours at A&E, there would be longer ambulance response times and 20 million people would have to wait a week or longer for a GP appointment, the party warned.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-30670633

[gmb45]

and so it begins, you cant trust any of them they spend more time slagging each other off, but cameron says it all about his party.

"Prime Minister David Cameron said Labour would spend an extra ?13.5bn on debt interest because of a reluctance to cut spending as quickly as his party would"........>>>cut spending as quickly as his party would<<<

so you will have ferk all if the cons get in, and ferk all if labour get in, sooner have ferk all under labour tbh.

[super jumbe]

What’s the alternative? Can not think any more!!!

[gmb45]

none really might as well be skint under labour init, well there is but they pisher.

[Meat-Head]

Thing is during summer was it ejpytion or Azusa Africa riots, wars or something, coal mine collapsed (torys shut ours), "UNLIMITED money here waiting"!!!

bridge in Pakistan us inglish paid for.

[gopher7]

Even if Labour get in at the next election (ha ha ha ), they'll carryon with the "Privatisation" of the NHS just the same way the Tories are doing at the moment. So in around 5yrs time healthcare in UK will be the same set up as USA, because it will all be owned by American companies anyway.

[nara]

Even if Labour get in at the next election (ha ha ha ), they'll carryon with the "Privatisation" of the NHS just the same way the Tories are doing at the moment. So in around 5yrs time healthcare in UK will be the same set up as USA, because it will all be owned by American companies anyway.

Is this just a personal opinion?

[super jumbe]

Is this just a personal opinion?

##### #####

[princewmk]

I would take labour any day that this stupid coalition power hungry idiots! Yes Sir k would

[gopher7]

##### #####

Is this just a personal opinion?

Yes.....

[DOUGALMCD]

A smart thinking opinion as the only way to get better is through change but most people don't like to rock the boat. It's about time the people of Britain changed the way politics are now as it is like an old boiler system that doesn't work anymore so stop trying to mend it. Renew it.

[super jumbe]

Nothing going to happen if you ask me, we are going for a bumpy ride, working person like me only take home 200 a week, ffs that amount I use to take 10 years a go, no wage rise, long hospital appointment, if for some reason you miss an appointment you can not get another appointment, like always they are reluctance to cut the spending but why cut when we pay national insurance from our wages, this is day time robbery they want to take the money and not help, I am lost.

[GastonJ]

Nothing going to happen if you ask me, we are going for a bumpy ride, working person like me only take home 200 a week, ffs that amount I use to take 10 years a go, no wage rise, long hospital appointment, if for some reason you miss an appointment you can not get another appointment, like always they are reluctance to cut the spending but why cut when we pay national insurance from our wages, this is day time robbery they want to take the money and not help, I am lost.

Minimum wage and WTD were both introduced by Labour in 1999. Tories never introduced it before then and they had plenty of time to do so. WTD was introduced by Labour, Dave says he wants it reviewed, probably to remove it. That way more people can be employed on minimum wage to work longer and likely die earlier as a result of having nor work/life balance. You can, with your employer opt out of the WTD (from memory) though do you really want to work more hours for the same low pay? TBH, I don't think the minimum wage is enough to live on and increasing the hours to make up for it isn't the best way to deal with the situation, a living wage would be fairer. Which do you think Dave would favor?

As for your appointment - Perhaps the asnwer is to phone the hospital before you can't make it, otherwise you get counted as not attended and go to the end of the queue. Been there done that myself, it's not a good position to be in.

Doesn't matter who's in power, how much of a deficit or surplus there is, how well the economy is running, or not - they'll still take your money with a smile and distribute to their 'friends'. It's a lose lose situation for everyone, always has been and always will be.

As for changing the system, by all means, but making sure that the changes are realistic, worthwhile and produce the efficiencies/savings NOT to sell bits off to your mates to cherry pick the easy work for as much profit as possible. Companies exist for a single purpose "To make as much money for the least effort/cost" and any company that invests in the NHS will be looking to make 100% profit year on year, for as little as possible, without a doubt.

SJ you are only employed by your company because your company can make a profit from your work, if that wasn't the case then you'd be unemployed. Apply that same logic to any company that wants to "invest in the NHS" and decide whether they'll do it for ?0.

[GastonJ]

The NHS in England has missed its four-hour A&E waiting time target with performance dropping to its lowest level for a decade, figures show.
From October to December 92.6% of patients were seen in four hours - below the 95% target.
The performance is the worst quarterly result since the target was introduced at the end of 2004.
The rest of the UK is also missing the target and a number of hospitals have declared "major incidents" recently.
This signifies they are facing exceptional pressures and triggers extra staff being called in and other steps, including cancelling non-emergency care, such as routine operations.



Health Secretary Jeremy *unt admitted meeting the A&E standard was proving tough, but pointed out that England has some of the toughest targets in the world.

BBC News - A&E waiting in England worst for a decade

Proving tough? they failed, unsure what's tough about lowering the targets and then his department failing to meet those targets *shrug*. Had those targets been in place during Labours years, then the targets would always have been surpassed, funny how the NHS always fails to meet targets when the Tories have the helm eh?. (Can see a few where the NHS missed the targets when Labour were at the helm, but not such a continual decline) That after the present government lowered the targets in an attempt to meet them, and still they failed. That after the government told the NHS to save ?20 billion (just under 20% of it's budget) by 2015 despite the government so called 'ring fencing' NHS spending. However taking money away from the NHS so that it can't cope means that it can be used as an excuse to hand out more money to profit making companies and reduce funding for the NHS, hand the easy stuff (at grossly inflated rates) to the private sector *shrug*


Anyway, a good read as always

NHS for sale :: Costs of Reforms