On no not again

[Gate Keeper]

I understand what you are saying Ray and I remember the Bakers case Tomorrow Theresa May will be elected. Then it will be down to her legal team and parliament to bring in the promised changes for much stricter anti-terrorism legislation and controls. I wonder if this will include freedom of speech. My comment is not meant to be political and neither is it meant to stir up bad feelings

[wraymond]

There's no doubt the law must be changed to allow a greater ability to respond effectively to these events. In addition the legal aid system that makes the taxpayer fund an eternal circus of appeals must be curtailed. I just hope that an ill-considered knee-jerk reaction doesn't provoke civil unrest just as great as what has been happening. There are plenty of people who will object to anything that 'the other side' tries.

[Gate Keeper]

I hear where you are coming from Ray. When I did freelance deportations, it depended on the background of each case. Some were deported within 24 hours of arriving, but the ones with a forensic or criminal history could take as long as 5 years, exhausting all channels of appeal. You are correct, paid for by the taxpayer. It wasn't very nice work, but had to be done on behalf of HM. Th May talked about stripping people/offenders of their British citizenship, then deporting them. A step in the right direction?

[Gate Keeper]

I watched an interview Diane Abbot gave 2 days ago and she presented as being thought disordered with poor concentration skills, either as a result of anxiety or depression, or something equally worrying. It was right for her to go on sick leave and I hope she makes a speedy recovery.

[RPWC]

Originally Posted by Gate Keeper

I understand what you are saying Ray and I remember the Bakers case Tomorrow Theresa May will be elected.

I sincerely hope not, heaven help the NHS and schools if she is.

[wraymond]

Originally Posted by Gate Keeper

I hear where you are coming from Ray. When I did freelance deportations, it depended on the background of each case. Some were deported within 24 hours of arriving, but the ones with a forensic or criminal history could take as long as 5 years, exhausting all channels of appeal. You are correct, paid for by the taxpayer. It wasn't very nice work, but had to be done on behalf of HM. Th May talked about stripping people/offenders of their British citizenship, then deporting them. A step in the right direction?

Personally, I'd be in favour of stripping citizenship but only if the legal framework had succeeded through Parliament on a free vote. If however they were UK born there's nowhere for them to go! So prison I suppose. Perhaps a return of the crime of Treason might be on.

In the case of Dianne Abbott I posted elsewhere some two weeks ago that she seemed lost, under considerable stress and heading for a breakdown.
I also thought she had been cast adrift in the hope of a resignation of someone who could not be sacked.

The unremitting exposure she has had recently has only served to show her unable to withstand the rigours of the job and sadly her unsuitability for high office. I'm absolutely no fan under any circumstances but I hope she seeks the treatment she obviously needs and makes a recovery.

[Gate Keeper]

Originally Posted by wraymond

Personally, I'd be in favour of stripping citizenship but only if the legal framework had succeeded through Parliament on a free vote. If however they were UK born there's nowhere for them to go! So prison I suppose. Perhaps a return of the crime of Treason might be on.

In the case of Dianne Abbott I posted elsewhere some two weeks ago that she seemed lost, under considerable stress and heading for a breakdown.
I also thought she had been cast adrift in the hope of a resignation of someone who could not be sacked.

The unremitting exposure she has had recently has only served to show her unable to withstand the rigours of the job and sadly her unsuitability for high office. I'm absolutely no fan under any circumstances but I hope she seeks the treatment she obviously needs and makes a recovery.

I should have added, the stripping will apply only to those with dual citizenship, with British citizenship being reviewed case by case, then removed by the Home Secretary, thus allowing for a deportation order to be made.

I had missed your previous post Ray, about Dianne Abbot. I agree with you, that she should seek treatment for whatever is ailing her. I am not one of her admirers and putting politics to one side, compassion is shown to someone who clearly is not well.

[Gate Keeper]

Originally Posted by RPWC

I sincerely hope not, heaven help the NHS and schools if she is.

Sorry Richard, I won't get into the political debate. If I did, the thread would be closed

[Darcydog]

I too wish Diane Abbott a speedy recovery - she was always struggling in her role it seemed to me. He responses seemed disconnected, vague and at a tangent to the subject matter long before any mention of illness.

A lot of people say one party or the other will either save or destroy the NHS. But we really ought to understand that the NHS is struggling because it was designed in the late 1940's as a wonderful service to treat illness.

But now the NHS is asked to collect drunks off the street on a Saturday night and is forced to keep elderly patients in hospital because successive governments have removed social care for these elderly patients in the community.

So in my view - as someone who has worked alongside the old Area Health Authorities and the Red Book, Stakeholder Practices, then the PCT's and the nGMS contract and now GP Commissioning Groups - there have been many attempts to improve things but as an outsider looking in, what is happening now is hardly an improvement for patients when you consider the level of service provided via the old "Red Book".

And that is just Primary Care. Some of the reports coming out of certain Hospital Trusts are deeply worrying. How can it possibly be right that a Hospital Tust Management Team can ignore the concerns of its medical staff about a rogue Surgeon - now in jail - because that rogue surgeon did such fast botch jobs that the Trust made more money out of him than they did from competent surgeons who did the job properly.

On a far smaller scale - I am currently battling with NHS administrators trying to confirm something that is a monumental money waste.

GP practices are now only giving out 28 day prescriptions on the grounds that this is "cheaper" than what used to happen where a patient could have a prescription for 3 months worth of treatment.

Now if you take a Eumovate cream for example - a 30g tube costs about £5 whereas a 100g tube costs £6.50.

So how can (over a 12 month period) providing 13 tubes at £5 be saving money compared to 4 tubes at £6.50 each?

Plus the NHS itself states that each prescription has a distinct unit cost whatever is being dispensed - so how can 13 Rx's be cheaper than 4 Rx's ?

I think the reason for this crazy situation is that GP practices have been targeted to reduce their average prescription costs. If they can do this then they get an increase in the "Global Sum" the Practice is paid to provide the service it does.

So - it seems to me that crazy management results in nice statistics where "average Rx costs are down" but where total Rx costs are actually significantly increased.

So IMO - it is all very well for some to say "hands off our NHS" - but this should not mean we should ignore obvious failings and chronic mismanagement that costs money and ruins lives.

The NHS is too valuable to be the political punchball that it is. But it does need reform and it does need objective assessment.

[Darcydog]

For me John - the most monumental waste of money was the old PCT's. They oversaw what GP''s could do as well as prescribe such that it was these PCT's - staffed by exactly the sort of people/mindset you describe - that created the treatment post code lottery where the treatment you received depended upon where you lived and what non-medically qualified "clueless" local quango your post code came under