Jump to content

'The economy is safe with the Tories'


Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Ant said:

Indeed, but I’m using them as an example of someone capable of doing it better than the NHS. Ultimately it’s a multi stakeholder engagement but the NHS would never be capable of delivering such a service on its own. It’s not what it was setup for and has historic failings when engaging on large projects. 

You’ve got to assume Starmer would have actually been more rational than Johnson, used the data for the benefit of all rather than the benefit of the political party he represents, oh and actually listened to his scientific advisors 

It's being delivered by a combination of Public Health Wales (NHS) & Local Authorities here - and has much higher tracing success rates than England.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 28.7k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Gilps

    2300

  • smithdown

    1753

  • pipnasty

    1705

  • Swan Red

    1701

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Ugh. Ok so purely on Churchill and the British aspect of the Second World War (I really don't want to go over all of his imperialism, and racism, and pre-war stuff - this is torture enough as it

Gordian Brown.  

You’ll drive yourself mad wondering what the working class want. End up tying yourself in knots like Gordon Brown. Just do what’s right, it’s much easier. Those white, English working class oap’s that

Posted Images

1 hour ago, Jarg Armani said:

When compared to Germany the NHS is obviously lacking in funding after the last 10-15 years of PFI and privatisation. It is also too centralised to be able to cope with an issue that could flare up anywhere. The German federal system of healthcare (and other public sectors) has proved to be much more agile than our centralised one. 

Instead of giving the job to Amazon we should be looking at more funding for our health service and devolving more power to our regions. 

I don't disagree about the funding point, but the NHS in areas like this has a strong track record of failing when you simply throw money at it, National Program for IT being an example and recent large scale funds around care records another. I'm not talking about the care of people here by the way but structurally the NHS is such a bigger beast than another healthcare system involved and it's like turning the Titanic. 

The NHS isn't setup to provide what is effectively a national day-by-day logistics challenge, and furthermore how we are setup from the NIHR, PHE, NHS X, NHS D, NHS England, NHS (Primary and Secondary care) doesn't lend itself to doing anything quickly or effectively with a problem of this magnitude. 

 

 

 

Edited by Ant
Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Ant said:

I don't disagree about the funding point, but the NHS in areas like this has a strong track record of failing when you simply throw money at it, National Program for IT being an example and recent large scale funds around care records another. I'm not talking about the care of people here by the way but structurally the NHS is such a bigger beast than another healthcare system involved and it's like turning the Titanic. 

The NHS isn't setup to provide what is effectively a national day-by-day logistics challenge, and furthermore how we are setup from the NIHR, PHE, NHS X, NHS D, NHS England, NHS (Primary and Secondary care) doesn't lend itself to doing anything quickly or effectively with a problem of this magnitude. 

 

 

 

Strongly disagree. The infrastructure is there, see Gethin’s post about Wales’ better delivery. Decentralise and fund it properly and NHS / local authority partnerships would obviously be better than frigging Amazon. Those private companies end up costing the NHS a huge amount and using the same data and infrastructure anyway.

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Jarg Armani said:

Strongly disagree. The infrastructure is there, see Gethin’s post about Wales’ better delivery. Decentralise and fund it properly and NHS / local authority partnerships would obviously be better than frigging Amazon. Those private companies end up costing the NHS a huge amount and using the same data and infrastructure anyway.

Wales has a fraction of the population and two relatively dense areas of population 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Ant said:

Wales has a fraction of the population and two relatively dense areas of population 

And?

England has proportionally similar levels of NHS and local authority staff that could be doing the same thing to the same (much better) level than outsourcing in England is doing, undoubtedly for a much cheaper cost than outsourcing it.

Edited by Gethin
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Romario said:

Boris never makes it past 2 questions without losing his s***e and slinging insults.He's crap.

Speaker Hoyle should have just got up and told him to shut up on Q6 and told him to answer what was a simple narrowly focussed question. Starmer was quite astute in choosing to narrow the subject of his last question, which inevitably just draws a torrent of unrelated bloviating drivel. He should be able to rely on Mr Speaker to put a stop to it. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Gethin said:

And?

England has proportionally similar levels of NHS and local authority staff that could be doing the same thing to the same (much better) level than outsourcing in England is doing, undoubtedly for a much cheaper cost than outsourcing it.

And? They're not comparable in terms of scale and complexities. For example the IT within Wales is delivered by one organisation with a central LIMS system for all the acutes.

To be clear I'm not defending the government's approach in England, but I am saying that it's incorrect to say that outsourcing is actually the issue, it's not. Sure if you threw enough money at it you might get somewhere, but money isn't the issue here as they've actually thrown a lot of it about, its the approach, cultures and ultimately judging a baby by its ability to climb Everest 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, pipnasty said:

The phrase 'throwing enough money at it' is so gammon its untrue

In this case its probably not true that if you threw enough money at it, you can't get a baby in 1 month by getting 9 women pregnant 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Ant said:

And? They're not comparable in terms of scale and complexities. For example the IT within Wales is delivered by one organisation with a central LIMS system for all the acutes.

To be clear I'm not defending the government's approach in England, but I am saying that it's incorrect to say that outsourcing is actually the issue, it's not. Sure if you threw enough money at it you might get somewhere, but money isn't the issue here as they've actually thrown a lot of it about, its the approach, cultures and ultimately judging a baby by its ability to climb Everest 

 

Your argument is "public sector good, outsourcing bad"

Wales has proved that it can do it for 3.5m people - hardly a trivial sample size - using public sector resources, delivering it cheaper and more effectively than England has done by outsourcing it to companies with really poor track records in project delivery. It's definitely scalable given that England has access to proportionally similar, if not more resource within that area of the public sector.

England might want to take a look at that and think about taking lessons from a government that's using public resources quickly, cost effectively and efficiently at a time of public crisis.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Gethin said:

Your argument is "public sector good, outsourcing bad"

Wales has proved that it can do it for 3.5m people - hardly a trivial sample size - using public sector resources, delivering it cheaper and more effectively than England has done by outsourcing it to companies with really poor track records in project delivery. It's definitely scalable given that England has access to proportionally similar, if not more resource within that area of the public sector.

England might want to take a look at that and think about taking lessons from a government that's using public resources quickly, cost effectively and efficiently at a time of public crisis.

 

i don't disagree with some of those points but the system in England is infinitely more complex than that in Wales, and as we stand right now the approach isn't replicable because the situation and structures are not replicable. 

For years and years the NHS in England has failed massively on large scale transformation projects be it merging of trust, large scale system deployments etc etc.

You've also got to factor in over 10 years of systemic cuts to the system and constant reform. 

The NHS is battered, it can't deliver such a program at this time of crisis without outsourcing elements of it. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Ant said:

The NHS is battered, it can't deliver such a program at this time of crisis without outsourcing elements of it. 

The NHS in Wales is also battered, probably suffers from worse underfunding than England. It just did.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, pipnasty said:

Again, that's just s***e

It isn’t, and you know why. Because even if you told the NHS to sort it out they’d come to the conclusion that it couldn’t actually do it very quickly. 

We also have to not talk about the NHS like it’s just one thing, it’s massive lads 

Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Ant said:

i don't disagree with some of those points but the system in England is infinitely more complex than that in Wales

I disagree with almost all of your points but this one is especially wrong. Saying things like infinitely more complex is both patronising to an entire country - well in -  and also factually daft. It is more complicated but the way you build anything is to use a test site (as the govt did with the isle of wight) then scale up.

  • Like 1
  • Love 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ant said:

I don't disagree about the funding point, but the NHS in areas like this has a strong track record of failing when you simply throw money at it, National Program for IT being an example and recent large scale funds around care records another. I'm not talking about the care of people here by the way but structurally the NHS is such a bigger beast than another healthcare system involved and it's like turning the Titanic. 

The NHS isn't setup to provide what is effectively a national day-by-day logistics challenge, and furthermore how we are setup from the NIHR, PHE, NHS X, NHS D, NHS England, NHS (Primary and Secondary care) doesn't lend itself to doing anything quickly or effectively with a problem of this magnitude. 

With NHS-wide IT programmes the money tends to be thrown at third party consulting/implementation partners, not at the NHS itself.

I did a pre-switch-on audit for O2 who were the infrastructure provider for NHS Scotland's equivalent of NHS Direct about 4 or 5 years back and despite the audit flagging up very clearly that Deloittes (who were the actual software implementers) had not tested sufficiently, had huge gaps in their governance and, and, and... they decided to go ahead anyway and, on the day they switched it on, they had to close it because it failed as soon as the public started using it. The NHS itself had very little to do with it..   

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ant said:

You've also got to factor in over 10 years of systemic cuts to the system and constant reform. 

The NHS is battered, it can't deliver such a program at this time of crisis without outsourcing elements of it. 

Thing is Ant.. this is the long term tory policy of how to be able to privatise the NHS and not have a whimper from the general population...

... defund it then say we should use Amazon.  Yes its a time of crisis but this is the thin end of a very thick wedge and absolutely this is something we, as a collective wherever possible, choose this hill to die on..  

  • Like 7
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...