Renton

Unfortunately Fish you only ever pop in here with the usual bias so your views are somewhat tainted and typical. Feel free to take part in an actual debate rather than a bit of cat calling from the sidelines. Get yer hands dirty. Rentons arguments have left him up so many dead ends tonight its quite shocking for a seemingly intelligent bloke. But thats what happens when you let bias get in the way of real facts. Shame Your style of 'debate' is simply to trawl the internet cherry picking opinions that suit your views. For every quote you give, I could quote somebody else giving the contrary viewpoint if I chose to. I don't do it because I'd rather give my own opinion, and frankly its boring. You still haven't answered how you feel that scrapping waiting list targets will be of benefit to you. I'd like your opinion please.

Explain how it is possible then? It would only be possible under two scenarios: 1) The healthcare budget is massively increased. 2) Money from other areas of the healthcare budget is diverted to pay for the drugs which have proven not to be cost effective. The former option simply won't happen during a recession, and in fact would never happen under a Conservative government. It would be fiscal suicide. The latter option would be so unfair and frankly idiotic it doesn't bear thinking about it. This would be a classic example of a political party using the NHS for their own political aims, rather than acting fairly or rationally. Labour have been guilty of this in the past as it happens but never to this extent. This is the last I'll say on this matter CT because frankly I don't think you know what you're talking about.

Exactly. Another pointless rent-a-quote from Mr Tree. CTY - from the perspective of YOU - a potential patient - do you think indefinite waiting lists are a good idea?

My opinion, as you ask for, is that if it can be done then it is a great thing indeed. Moving onto fact, the policy WAS to start this program from 2011. It has changed The policy is now to try and bring this forward to this Autum. Putting the economics to one side, do you approve of this policy? Do I approve of giving everybody the treatment they need? Of course I do. Is it possible? No - it's not. You can't just brush the economics aside - it's the key to the whole matter. No country in the World can afford to give its citizens all the healthcare they desire or need. There will have to be some system of copayment, where the rich can be treated and the poor will not be. Cameron either knows this, and is lying, or he is a fucking idiot. Take your pick.

Since you are being so pedantic in your comment to LM I will be pedantic here - I haven't said he lied, I said it looks to me as if he has by scrapping these targets, and his impossible promise of anticancer drugs for everyone. The targets aren't in my area of professional expertise, but their implications should be obviouis to the layman - the 18 week one at least. It effectively means you may be kept indefinitely on waiting lists for elective operations. Please tell me how this can possibly be a good thing? Lets just clear this one up. What you said was..... He didnt lie. He kept his promise. 'Looks like'. It still looks like a lie to me, promises haven't been kept yet, and we've yet to find out if they will be, haven't we? So, from a lay perspective, scrapping the 18 week waiting time - good or bad?

I voted for the cunts but I always have done, (Sort of in the family,Nan was a good friend of David Steele) Osborne has made Thatcher look like a benevolent defender of the poorest members of society this afternoon...I hope Clegg and the rest of the bandwagon jumpers can look the grass roots in the face at the next party conference.. What a load of drivel Wheres your vitriol for the fuckers who got us into this mess. Labour fucked up big time, but they improved a lot of things in this country and what they did in comparison with certain bankers was fuckin childs play....no city fuck up= little or no current recession in my book. Then no need for Brown to be blamed for everything from the 10p tax rate to the crucifiction of christ and perhaps we'd still have a government that for the most part (and despite their many and glaring faults) actually wanted to make life better for ordinary people.This lot don't and never will. But they didn't. The Labour government was the worst case of Orwell's animal farm syndrome ever. In the 13 years they were in power the gap between the richest and poorest rose. The amount of children in poverty grew and we decided to back the most right wing government in America in centuries. Added on top of that the absolute fuck up over bank regulation which gets despicable when you see that the head of RBS was whispering in Browns ear plus the corruption in Labour counvcils which I have proof of. The last 13 years saw the most un Labour Labour party in history. Spot on and very sad for genuine Labour supporters who now have to bear the shame. Relative poverty might be unchanged (or may be worse, I'd like to see some independent figures), but absolute poverty has certainly declined. Anyone with eyes and a brain should know that. Labour embraced free market capitalism, yes. There was really little option though as traditional socialism had been rejected four elections on the trot. They went for what worked, and for the large part, it did work. Besides, if Labour has drifted to the right then that should appease the likes of you, shouldn't it? Child poverty went up by 100,000 under Labour since 2004....(Labours own figures) didn't your hero say they wouldn't raise VAT in his election "promises" No he did and from the Daily Mail too http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12...x-increase.html Hardly got started and he's lied already And just for good measure......... http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/election-2...put-up-VAT.html Im suprised an old codger like you doesnt know the political difference between "we wont" and "we have no plans" If you need a refresher heres a page detailing the 27 election pledges Labour broke in 2005 including such goodies as... They lied, they did http://iaindale.blogspot.com/2010/04/labou...o-promises.html And what a shit storm that caused.

Since you are being so pedantic in your comment to LM I will be pedantic here - I haven't said he lied, I said it looks to me as if he has by scrapping these targets, and his impossible promise of anticancer drugs for everyone. The targets aren't in my area of professional expertise, but their implications should be obviouis to the layman - the 18 week one at least. It effectively means you may be kept indefinitely on waiting lists for elective operations. Please tell me how this can possibly be a good thing?

Yeah, those were my thoughts. It's all relative and a child in poverty here is like a millionaire when compared to most countries. Although it's not good that the distribution of wealth has become more extreme I do believe Labour tried - and perhaps failed - at reducing it.

I voted for the cunts but I always have done, (Sort of in the family,Nan was a good friend of David Steele) Osborne has made Thatcher look like a benevolent defender of the poorest members of society this afternoon...I hope Clegg and the rest of the bandwagon jumpers can look the grass roots in the face at the next party conference.. What a load of drivel Wheres your vitriol for the fuckers who got us into this mess. Labour fucked up big time, but they improved a lot of things in this country and what they did in comparison with certain bankers was fuckin childs play....no city fuck up= little or no current recession in my book. Then no need for Brown to be blamed for everything from the 10p tax rate to the crucifiction of christ and perhaps we'd still have a government that for the most part (and despite their many and glaring faults) actually wanted to make life better for ordinary people.This lot don't and never will. But they didn't. The Labour government was the worst case of Orwell's animal farm syndrome ever. In the 13 years they were in power the gap between the richest and poorest rose. The amount of children in poverty grew and we decided to back the most right wing government in America in centuries. Added on top of that the absolute fuck up over bank regulation which gets despicable when you see that the head of RBS was whispering in Browns ear plus the corruption in Labour counvcils which I have proof of. The last 13 years saw the most un Labour Labour party in history. Spot on and very sad for genuine Labour supporters who now have to bear the shame. Relative poverty might be unchanged (or may be worse, I'd like to see some independent figures), but absolute poverty has certainly declined. Anyone with eyes and a brain should know that. Labour embraced free market capitalism, yes. There was really little option though as traditional socialism had been rejected four elections on the trot. They went for what worked, and for the large part, it did work. Besides, if Labour has drifted to the right then that should appease the likes of you, shouldn't it? Child poverty went up by 100,000 under Labour since 2004....(Labours own figures) Have you got a link, out of interest? Just curious whether this is an absolute or relative measure. Seems odd to criticise Labour for being too generous on welfare yet criticse them for worsening pverty at the same time. How can both be true?

It's not really my concern but I fail to see how you can improve quality of care without having objective targets. The NHS is certain to decline under this government. Of more interest to me from a personal point of view is what happens to NICE. Rumours are afoot big changes are coming, none of which will be good imo. Fair enough I was mainly asking from an insiders point of view as to how the targets culture over the last few years had gone down. Thought it may have been the sort of stuff you discussed with the nurses and doctors in the canteen over lunch. Naah, I'm quite detached from the clinical realities of the NHS really. I'm more involved with clinical effectivenss of interventions, and more recently cost effectiveness. Seriously though, I'm not being partisan here when I say this government doesn't seem to have a clue what its doing regarding healthcare. For instance, before the election, Cameron promised a chest of money for the provision of cancer treatments. This just sounds like popularist bullshit to me. Early days still, we'll see soon enough. If your not been partisan then you'll agree their decisions have being reduced somewhat by the state of the countries finances. Have you also noted that Asda is to start selling all Cancer drugs at cost. Just chatting about this at lunch. The clinicians are all agreed that the targets are being removed as a prelude to reducing the quality of service. Makes perfect sense if you think about it. Btw CT, Cameron had promised the NHS would not be affected by his cuts. Looks like that was a lie then. Cough, Cough What on Earth are you talking about? This budget was never going to be about funding to the NHS, that will come later, no doubt when they've checked the books again and they're strangely in a worse state than anticipated - again! I'll remind you though of what Cameron said before the election, which was basically that doctor's will be able to prescribe any anticancer drug they want regardless of whether NICE has deemed it cost effective or not. Now, that is either the most blatent example of electioneering I have ever heard - because that promise is clearly undeliverable at the best of times let alone now - or it means Cameron hasn't got a clue about the economics of the health service. So which is it in your opinion? As for this budget, really its quite underwhelming isn't it? It's been built up to be something it's not, probably deliberately. However, as the COnservatives are fixing it so that they will have 5 years of power, even though they are a minority government, they have plenty of time to screw us over. Amazing stuff, even by your standards Care to elaborate what you mean? Was it a lie... yes or no...Simples Was what a lie? You said Cameron lied about not cutting the NHS budget. They have said very clearly....They are not cutting the NHS budget. they are removing targets in readiness to decrease service provision, I am fairly sure frontline cuts must be coming. They are removing some targets because they think some targets are shit. The money saved will be re-spent within the NHS. Once again they have said there will be no cuts. I know what's been promised but that doesn't mean he will keep his promises over the course of a parliament does it? I don't know anyone working in the NHS who believes there will be no cuts. We'll have to wait and see, but I stand by my comment that the reason for removing targets in the NHS is likely to be because services are going to be adversely affected. They also anounced this week that the new Stockton hospital was being cancelled - is that not a cut in your world? Now, a question for you, do you think the 18 week target was 'shit'? If so, why? Removing it paves the way back for two year waiting lists - is this acceptable to you?

Good performance but it was against Slovenia ffs! Apparently the USA has a bigger prison population than Slovenia.

Who are England likely to draw then? Exciting match that, I have to say.

Had a few kobe steaks - top notch but worth the price? Not so sure. What price are they? There is/was a place down from my work that did them for £15 - they advertised they were £50 elsewhere. Alcohol in your last meal is cheating imo. In reality I'd not be able to eat anything, my mind would be on other things. depends where you go if they're really kobe - you can pay anywhere up to £100 quid for one. I recall someone (not a veggie) telling me they wouldn't touch Kobe steaks because it was cruel. WTF? The cows are fed beer and massaged everyday, I'd probably happily exchange places with them.

Had a few kobe steaks - top notch but worth the price? Not so sure. What price are they? There is/was a place down from my work that did them for £15 - they advertised they were £50 elsewhere. Alcohol in your last meal is cheating imo. In reality I'd not be able to eat anything, my mind would be on other things.

I voted for the cunts but I always have done, (Sort of in the family,Nan was a good friend of David Steele) Osborne has made Thatcher look like a benevolent defender of the poorest members of society this afternoon...I hope Clegg and the rest of the bandwagon jumpers can look the grass roots in the face at the next party conference.. What a load of drivel Wheres your vitriol for the fuckers who got us into this mess. Labour fucked up big time, but they improved a lot of things in this country and what they did in comparison with certain bankers was fuckin childs play....no city fuck up= little or no current recession in my book. Then no need for Brown to be blamed for everything from the 10p tax rate to the crucifiction of christ and perhaps we'd still have a government that for the most part (and despite their many and glaring faults) actually wanted to make life better for ordinary people.This lot don't and never will. But they didn't. The Labour government was the worst case of Orwell's animal farm syndrome ever. In the 13 years they were in power the gap between the richest and poorest rose. The amount of children in poverty grew and we decided to back the most right wing government in America in centuries. Added on top of that the absolute fuck up over bank regulation which gets despicable when you see that the head of RBS was whispering in Browns ear plus the corruption in Labour counvcils which I have proof of. The last 13 years saw the most un Labour Labour party in history. Spot on and very sad for genuine Labour supporters who now have to bear the shame. Relative poverty might be unchanged (or may be worse, I'd like to see some independent figures), but absolute poverty has certainly declined. Anyone with eyes and a brain should know that. Labour embraced free market capitalism, yes. There was really little option though as traditional socialism had been rejected four elections on the trot. They went for what worked, and for the large part, it did work. Besides, if Labour has drifted to the right then that should appease the likes of you, shouldn't it?

It's not really my concern but I fail to see how you can improve quality of care without having objective targets. The NHS is certain to decline under this government. Of more interest to me from a personal point of view is what happens to NICE. Rumours are afoot big changes are coming, none of which will be good imo. Fair enough I was mainly asking from an insiders point of view as to how the targets culture over the last few years had gone down. Thought it may have been the sort of stuff you discussed with the nurses and doctors in the canteen over lunch. Naah, I'm quite detached from the clinical realities of the NHS really. I'm more involved with clinical effectivenss of interventions, and more recently cost effectiveness. Seriously though, I'm not being partisan here when I say this government doesn't seem to have a clue what its doing regarding healthcare. For instance, before the election, Cameron promised a chest of money for the provision of cancer treatments. This just sounds like popularist bullshit to me. Early days still, we'll see soon enough. If your not been partisan then you'll agree their decisions have being reduced somewhat by the state of the countries finances. Have you also noted that Asda is to start selling all Cancer drugs at cost. Just chatting about this at lunch. The clinicians are all agreed that the targets are being removed as a prelude to reducing the quality of service. Makes perfect sense if you think about it. Btw CT, Cameron had promised the NHS would not be affected by his cuts. Looks like that was a lie then. Cough, Cough What on Earth are you talking about? This budget was never going to be about funding to the NHS, that will come later, no doubt when they've checked the books again and they're strangely in a worse state than anticipated - again! I'll remind you though of what Cameron said before the election, which was basically that doctor's will be able to prescribe any anticancer drug they want regardless of whether NICE has deemed it cost effective or not. Now, that is either the most blatent example of electioneering I have ever heard - because that promise is clearly undeliverable at the best of times let alone now - or it means Cameron hasn't got a clue about the economics of the health service. So which is it in your opinion? As for this budget, really its quite underwhelming isn't it? It's been built up to be something it's not, probably deliberately. However, as the COnservatives are fixing it so that they will have 5 years of power, even though they are a minority government, they have plenty of time to screw us over. Amazing stuff, even by your standards Care to elaborate what you mean? Was it a lie... yes or no...Simples Was what a lie? The departmental budget hasn't been anounced yet. But considering they are removing targets in readiness to decrease service provision, I am fairly sure frontline cuts must be coming. What about Cameron's promise to fund all cancer drugs regardless of cost effectiveness? Do you believe that?

These days you get arrested for that type of behaviour! To be fair I saved my worst behaviour for air shows. Even worse than country shows imo. Some old shit heap transport plane limping past time and again while you sit and hope for the red arrows to make an appearance. I think I'd rather stab my eye with a pencil tbh. At least you have the excitement of possible death if one crashes. These country shows remind me of the travelling fair on Craggy island.

Totally agree with this. Pretty much always been the case though.

It's not really my concern but I fail to see how you can improve quality of care without having objective targets. The NHS is certain to decline under this government. Of more interest to me from a personal point of view is what happens to NICE. Rumours are afoot big changes are coming, none of which will be good imo. Fair enough I was mainly asking from an insiders point of view as to how the targets culture over the last few years had gone down. Thought it may have been the sort of stuff you discussed with the nurses and doctors in the canteen over lunch. Naah, I'm quite detached from the clinical realities of the NHS really. I'm more involved with clinical effectivenss of interventions, and more recently cost effectiveness. Seriously though, I'm not being partisan here when I say this government doesn't seem to have a clue what its doing regarding healthcare. For instance, before the election, Cameron promised a chest of money for the provision of cancer treatments. This just sounds like popularist bullshit to me. Early days still, we'll see soon enough. If your not been partisan then you'll agree their decisions have being reduced somewhat by the state of the countries finances. Have you also noted that Asda is to start selling all Cancer drugs at cost. Just chatting about this at lunch. The clinicians are all agreed that the targets are being removed as a prelude to reducing the quality of service. Makes perfect sense if you think about it. Btw CT, Cameron had promised the NHS would not be affected by his cuts. Looks like that was a lie then. Cough, Cough What on Earth are you talking about? This budget was never going to be about funding to the NHS, that will come later, no doubt when they've checked the books again and they're strangely in a worse state than anticipated - again! I'll remind you though of what Cameron said before the election, which was basically that doctor's will be able to prescribe any anticancer drug they want regardless of whether NICE has deemed it cost effective or not. Now, that is either the most blatent example of electioneering I have ever heard - because that promise is clearly undeliverable at the best of times let alone now - or it means Cameron hasn't got a clue about the economics of the health service. So which is it in your opinion? As for this budget, really its quite underwhelming isn't it? It's been built up to be something it's not, probably deliberately. However, as the COnservatives are fixing it so that they will have 5 years of power, even though they are a minority government, they have plenty of time to screw us over. Amazing stuff, even by your standards Care to elaborate what you mean?

Cords and Brogues man nowadays?

My thoughts exactly. Jesus wept at some of these!

It's not really my concern but I fail to see how you can improve quality of care without having objective targets. The NHS is certain to decline under this government. Of more interest to me from a personal point of view is what happens to NICE. Rumours are afoot big changes are coming, none of which will be good imo. Fair enough I was mainly asking from an insiders point of view as to how the targets culture over the last few years had gone down. Thought it may have been the sort of stuff you discussed with the nurses and doctors in the canteen over lunch. Naah, I'm quite detached from the clinical realities of the NHS really. I'm more involved with clinical effectivenss of interventions, and more recently cost effectiveness. Seriously though, I'm not being partisan here when I say this government doesn't seem to have a clue what its doing regarding healthcare. For instance, before the election, Cameron promised a chest of money for the provision of cancer treatments. This just sounds like popularist bullshit to me. Early days still, we'll see soon enough. If your not been partisan then you'll agree their decisions have being reduced somewhat by the state of the countries finances. Have you also noted that Asda is to start selling all Cancer drugs at cost. Just chatting about this at lunch. The clinicians are all agreed that the targets are being removed as a prelude to reducing the quality of service. Makes perfect sense if you think about it. Btw CT, Cameron had promised the NHS would not be affected by his cuts. Looks like that was a lie then. Cough, Cough What on Earth are you talking about? This budget was never going to be about funding to the NHS, that will come later, no doubt when they've checked the books again and they're strangely in a worse state than anticipated - again! I'll remind you though of what Cameron said before the election, which was basically that doctor's will be able to prescribe any anticancer drug they want regardless of whether NICE has deemed it cost effective or not. Now, that is either the most blatent example of electioneering I have ever heard - because that promise is clearly undeliverable at the best of times let alone now - or it means Cameron hasn't got a clue about the economics of the health service. So which is it in your opinion? As for this budget, really its quite underwhelming isn't it? It's been built up to be something it's not, probably deliberately. However, as the COnservatives are fixing it so that they will have 5 years of power, even though they are a minority government, they have plenty of time to screw us over.

Who's grooming who?

Thanks. Truth hurts Kevin, better to have it off me than some cunt interviewing you. They may not be a s harsh once they see you're special needs like. I hope you get hit by a bus. If it's any consolation they're better than I can do.

A hung parliament will be bad for Britain