One step closer to a two tier NHS

Field said he had decided not to address the cap because of mixed feedback from hospitals – at University Hospital Birmingham the cap is set at 1% while the Royal Marsden in London's cap is set at about 30%.

"So University Hospital Birmingham couldn't bring money in which would actually help its NHS services," Field said as he pointed out that lifting the cap would leave hospitals more vulnerable to competition law. "On the other hand, if you opened the cap it may be more likely to be under … EU law, and from competition and from Monitor. So when we weighed up the proposals and the problems that might arise we chose not to go into any great detail."

John Healey, Labour's shadow health secretary, said: "Steve Field is right and this was a serious omission from the Future Forum report. Removing the private patients' cap is a vital feature of the government's plans to turn the health service into a full-scale market, which will see NHS patients waiting longer and open up hospitals to greater challenge under competition law."

Sue Slipman, the director of the Foundation Trust Network, said it was right to lift the cap. Slipman told MPs: "Depending upon the range of patient choices, it isn't necessarily the case that there would be fewer NHS patients if you expand the facilities as a result of the money you can [raise]. It depends where you invest that money.

"The term 'private patient cap' is a misnomer. This is all money that can be brought into the system as a result of any service which may derive from private patients. So, for example, if you run laundry in your hospital and any of that laundry is used by those who supply services to private patients, this counts against the cap. We believe that the lifting of the private patient cap would enable public providers to being more money into the NHS to benefit NHS patients."

The BMA membership rejected leader Dr Hamish Meldrum's attempts to reassure them that key elements of the bill should not damage the NHS.

Their motion said there was still anxiety about:

• The role of the NHS regulator Monitor. They fear it will still promote competition between hospitals, even though Meldrum insisted that "competition has gone" as Monitor's main duty as a result of changes following the NHS Future Forum.

Field said he had decided not to address the cap because of mixed feedback from hospitals – at University Hospital Birmingham the cap is set at 1% while the Royal Marsden in London's cap is set at about 30%.

"So University Hospital Birmingham couldn't bring money in which would actually help its NHS services," Field said as he pointed out that lifting the cap would leave hospitals more vulnerable to competition law. "On the other hand, if you opened the cap it may be more likely to be under … EU law, and from competition and from Monitor. So when we weighed up the proposals and the problems that might arise we chose not to go into any great detail."

John Healey, Labour's shadow health secretary, said: "Steve Field is right and this was a serious omission from the Future Forum report. Removing the private patients' cap is a vital feature of the government's plans to turn the health service into a full-scale market, which will see NHS patients waiting longer and open up hospitals to greater challenge under competition law."

Sue Slipman, the director of the Foundation Trust Network, said it was right to lift the cap. Slipman told MPs: "Depending upon the range of patient choices, it isn't necessarily the case that there would be fewer NHS patients if you expand the facilities as a result of the money you can [raise]. It depends where you invest that money.

"The term 'private patient cap' is a misnomer. This is all money that can be brought into the system as a result of any service which may derive from private patients. So, for example, if you run laundry in your hospital and any of that laundry is used by those who supply services to private patients, this counts against the cap. We believe that the lifting of the private patient cap would enable public providers to being more money into the NHS to benefit NHS patients."

The BMA membership rejected leader Dr Hamish Meldrum's attempts to reassure them that key elements of the bill should not damage the NHS.

Their motion said there was still anxiety about:

• The role of the NHS regulator Monitor. They fear it will still promote competition between hospitals, even though Meldrum insisted that "competition has gone" as Monitor's main duty as a result of changes following the NHS Future Forum.
Field said he had decided not to address the cap because of mixed feedback from hospitals – at University Hospital Birmingham the cap is set at 1% while the Royal Marsden in London's cap is set at about 30%.

"So University Hospital Birmingham couldn't bring money in which would actually help its NHS services," Field said as he pointed out that lifting the cap would leave hospitals more vulnerable to competition law. "On the other hand, if you opened the cap it may be more likely to be under … EU law, and from competition and from Monitor. So when we weighed up the proposals and the problems that might arise we chose not to go into any great detail."

John Healey, Labour's shadow health secretary, said: "Steve Field is right and this was a serious omission from the Future Forum report. Removing the private patients' cap is a vital feature of the government's plans to turn the health service into a full-scale market, which will see NHS patients waiting longer and open up hospitals to greater challenge under competition law."

Sue Slipman, the director of the Foundation Trust Network, said it was right to lift the cap. Slipman told MPs: "Depending upon the range of patient choices, it isn't necessarily the case that there would be fewer NHS patients if you expand the facilities as a result of the money you can [raise]. It depends where you invest that money.

"The term 'private patient cap' is a misnomer. This is all money that can be brought into the system as a result of any service which may derive from private patients. So, for example, if you run laundry in your hospital and any of that laundry is used by those who supply services to private patients, this counts against the cap. We believe that the lifting of the private patient cap would enable public providers to being more money into the NHS to benefit NHS patients."

The BMA membership rejected leader Dr Hamish Meldrum's attempts to reassure them that key elements of the bill should not damage the NHS.

Their motion said there was still anxiety about:

• The role of the NHS regulator Monitor. They fear it will still promote competition between hospitals, even though Meldrum insisted that "competition has gone" as Monitor's main duty as a result of changes following the NHS Future Forum.


Field said he had decided not to address the cap because of mixed feedback from hospitals – at University Hospital Birmingham the cap is set at 1% while the Royal Marsden in London's cap is set at about 30%.

"So University Hospital Birmingham couldn't bring money in which would actually help its NHS services," Field said as he pointed out that lifting the cap would leave hospitals more vulnerable to competition law. "On the other hand, if you opened the cap it may be more likely to be under … EU law, and from competition and from Monitor. So when we weighed up the proposals and the problems that might arise we chose not to go into any great detail."

John Healey, Labour's shadow health secretary, said: "Steve Field is right and this was a serious omission from the Future Forum report. Removing the private patients' cap is a vital feature of the government's plans to turn the health service into a full-scale market, which will see NHS patients waiting longer and open up hospitals to greater challenge under competition law."

Sue Slipman, the director of the Foundation Trust Network, said it was right to lift the cap. Slipman told MPs: "Depending upon the range of patient choices, it isn't necessarily the case that there would be fewer NHS patients if you expand the facilities as a result of the money you can [raise]. It depends where you invest that money.

"The term 'private patient cap' is a misnomer. This is all money that can be brought into the system as a result of any service which may derive from private patients. So, for example, if you run laundry in your hospital and any of that laundry is used by those who supply services to private patients, this counts against the cap. We believe that the lifting of the private patient cap would enable public providers to being more money into the NHS to benefit NHS patients."

The BMA membership rejected leader Dr Hamish Meldrum's attempts to reassure them that key elements of the bill should not damage the NHS.

Their motion said there was still anxiety about:

• The role of the NHS regulator Monitor. They fear it will still promote competition between hospitals, even though Meldrum insisted that "competition has gone" as Monitor's main duty as a result of changes following the NHS Future Forum.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2011/jun/28/nhs-private-patients-doubts

Another great socialist MP

I see Ms Angela Smith is showing us her great Socialist prognoses.

Check out her comments on the Progress site a site well known for it's socialism, Joking of course.

Ms Smith use to remember a chap living by her who had an old car, it was polished shining, he'd come home park it and look after it, he'd polish it in his blue overalls he was hard working, council house family man, his house was nice.

His car was old but shinning because he had pride.

Then again Angela for working all those long hours you'd think a Labour Government would have paid him enough so he could have bought a nice new car.


These people come from another world, she was elected of course on a women only short list, what a shock taking a Tory strong hold, well she was more Tory I suspect then the Tory.

But this idea that we have millions according to the ONS we have nearly 8.5 million people unemployed at the moment that means registered unemployed but not getting JSA a trick Blair and Thatcher knew about.

But right now in my area if your disabled it's almost impossible to get a job, if your not disabled it's almost impossible to get a job, but hell this is Wales.


The sooner we in Wales make a bloody break from buffoons in England and leave the Tory-ish New labour party the better.

Nothing like pride in the dead who die for this country, proud of our people seems not if your a Tory.

For several years, the flag-draped coffins of fallen servicemen and women have been met by large crowds who line the streets to pay their respects as they return to British soil.

But repatriation flights are to be diverted and will no longer be flown back to RAF Lyneham and through the small Wiltshire town of Royal Wootton Bassett, where they were saluted come rain or shine.

Instead, they will arrive back to RAF Brize Norton, where they will be driven through the back gate and then down side roads, neatly avoiding the nearby town of Carterton, as they make their way to the John Radcliffe Hospital in Oxford.

Andrew Robathan, Minister for Defence Personnel, Welfare and Veterans, admitted that the decision to avoid public scenes of emotion had been taken deliberately.

“The side gate was seen by the Ministry of Defence and the police as the most appropriate way to take out future corteges,”

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/defence/8599504/War-dead-to-be-driven-down-side-streets-to-avoid-the-public.html


That has to be the biggest disgrace that can be placed on our dead, that and dying for a lie of course.

we should be honouring these people all over the country and proud that they gave their lives, not bloody hiding them....

Refounding labour or just floundering

So the big meeting in Wrexham lots of big words to the socialist Welsh labour party, must have stuck in Miliband throat. Then we had the normal sell off of what was wrong with Labour but hello we did get somethings right.

Like well School building program, yes but was it correct to build them using PFI.

Then Hospital building OK yes but was it right to flog them off to private firms and again PFI.

Then we have Jobs millions given jobs, but of course were these job real, labour them selves stated they had to reduce the amount of people working in the public sector, Brown him self stated he wanted 300,000 jobs to go. So how many jobs did Labour make in my small Welsh town, not a lot really, he closed the benefits office, he closed the tax office and he closed our DWP, so he closed more then he actually made.


Then of course we had the sorry of those poor people who have cancer, he then spoiled his attempt to make the Tories look bad by saying some of these people worked hard and paid into the pot, well so what about the children who are born with cancer or the youths who get cancer before working are these people out side of society, what about people given Blood transfusions now have Aids, what about people who have contracted HIV, or are they naughty for having sex. God help the poor old drug addicts under Newer labour your to blame for everything.

But the fact is those poor cancer suffers who worked so hard paid into the pots are only going through the new medicals because of Labour. I quote Mr Blair people must have medicals to ensure they are suffering and are not just work shy, well I suspect people with Cancer broken backs spinal injuries HIV AIDS and the many many more mental health issues , soldiers with out legs without arms are all so called work shy because they have had their bloody arms and legs blown off.


This is not refounding labour it's a party floundering to find a reason to be.

Job center

Down I go into the main doors to be met by security, yes Mate can we help you, it's my disability appointment with my special adviser mate.

Lets check sorry your name's not on here, but she did leave you three job applications, see you next month bye.

I have been getting this now for months, just three job offers which I check and then dump into the bin by the door, this time it's not a taxi driver, but a long distance painter and decorator must be able to work at heights must be able to work away from home five years experience.

The other one was cold calling for a cosmetic firm, and the other was loans selling.

Ah the choice of jobs we are getting, the special adviser I notice is now working helping the many unemployed find work so she cannot be a special adviser as well.

Nothing like good old government treatment.
Never mind.

The London games 2012 football

Great News we will have a team in the Olympic games, run of course by England, without talking to anyone England has decided they will have a British Football team, forget asking the other countries.

But of course you will need eleven players, I suspect eight or even eleven will be English one from Ireland one from Scotland and One from Wales well they have to have subs. Rumour doing the rounds it will be the under twenty one squad, which should mean a short playing period.

Then we will have the highlight of watching FIFA repay the arguments over bribery by stating England has proved beyond doubt that we have one national team called GB which of course will be Run by the English FA, how many players from out side of England, not to long ago England said any player who had been in the UK for ten years who has not played for any other national team could be eligible for England.

What a bloody nerve.

Newer labour

I watched Ed Miliband to day PMQ's according to labour list of course Ed won the tiff hands down 100 points, but actually he did not, once he brought out the silly DNA Data base idea, he was on a loser I can see people all over the country thinking yes it's newer labour. Blair's idea, Blair's plan put in place by a new labour Eddie the eagle Miliband.

labour it looks to me has nothing to offer ordinary working people, the silly idea that getting a DNA swab from a lady who says she was raped would not prove rape, all it proves is sex has taken place, it would again come down to the same battle she said no he would say she said yes.

But whom wants to be on a register of DNA so insurance companies could carry out a review of your insurance risk because your DNA state you might die of a heart attack or cancer.

I suspect labour has not given up on ID cards either another Blair toy.

Tory MP says work for lower pay..... shocking no not really

Tory back Bencher who has a habit of silly comments state the disabled should be allowed to opt out of the min wage, labour See's red, well nice to see anything red in labour these days.

Mr Davies the chap who said he cannot see the problem with people darkening up their faces, has come up with a few ripe replies.

But is he wrong, the new WCA is now placing more disabled people onto JSA job seekers which is of course £67 a week, not enough to live on, so why should a disabled person not sell his labour for say £4 an hour, work for six months and then get paid if they can do the job the full wage.

Disabled people like myself are not getting jobs because when we go for work a dozen other people many fit and healthy apply as well and to be honest why would an employer employ me.

Well labour stated I must sell my self do not look down look up look forward, easy to say when your sitting in a wheelchair, and the company wants a person to fill shelves and they say to you can you fill the top shelf and you say nope.

Or can you climb a ladder, or can you walk a mile can you drive a car, yes but only if you put in hand controls that cost £10,000.

In most countries laws are in place that companies who employ twenty or more employee's must employ two or three disabled people but not here, I have to prove to everyone I can do the job, and the simple fact I cannot fill shelves, I cannot pick up litter and I cannot write a letter faster then a full trained person.

So my only thing left is to let me or allow me to sell myself on the market. Because living on £67 a week JSA is not something I want...or of course make a real medical test for the disabled not this shame we have now.

Labour whats new.

I was talking to this gent by me who is getting on a bit now, he has a disability from a mine accident a long time ago which took his leg off. I said my grand father lost his legs when a pit prop broke, he said same thing.

I said about how labour was changing and had changed under Kinnock and then Blair, and he said to me labour was not the party people think it is. He said I can go way back before the war, he said even after the war people make out labour to be this socialist party sent to help the people, he said well it never helped me much.

Got me remembering the days at Aberfan, I was in the valleys that day, and saw the Miners rushing over the mountains to get to the school. I was thinking about Wilson who has just won an election and the ex MP Robens who was with the NCB, who did not arrive at the village a day late. He then demanded the charity money be used to clear up the mess including the waste tips the slag heaps, when Wilson stated the money would come from the NCB this gent stated it would not and he demanded that the charity money be used, and it was. OK Blair returned the money many years later but it does I suspect show how we think labour was some how socialist.

I remember the fighting between the Tories and labour over DLA for the disabled and how labour felt it was money wasted.

I see Miliband now is carrying on his idea telling us a story about a chap he knows who's disabled, Miliband stated i believe he was able to work, he believed, what happens if that chap had terminal cancer, or if he has something else wrong with him is Mr Miliband a doctor now, or is it like many in labour who surmise what they think is going on.

I'm no fan of the Tories but if I had a choice right now on voting I'd vote Tory or maybe not, but i do know it would not be labour that's for sure

Miliband on grafters

Grafter labour is the party of grafters, in my area that means frauds people who graft steal, perhaps expenses, who's party have four leading MP's in jail, oh yes Labours grafters.

I cannot wait to see how labour will put into place the private sector jobs to get those grafters back to work, mind you perhaps some of those MP's people like Purnell and the Milibands them selves could do with a few years of grafting out on a building site, but of course thats not going to happen is it.

Dear god Labours dead long live the Tories.

Blair is back or is it Miliband

Miliband speech we are told will be about getting council housing for the middle class, the nurses the police officers you know the important middle class earners who would not be seen dead in council houses around me, the sick the disabled those on JSA well where do they go now, interment camps, tents, kicked out.

I'm not sure where the hell labour is going hopefully out of power for the rest of my life thats for sure.

But Miliband is seeking that niche, the NHS he has lost as the Tories do a U turn, so labour has to find another method of getting those people who now would vote UKIP/ Tory rather then labour.

Pretty shock if the releases of his speech is right, upper class, middle class lower class, and untouchables.

But if the past 13 years how many jobs did labour make in the private sector which can be classed as real jobs, I know they produced a hell of a lot of non jobs in the public sector. how do we get people back to work in my area people are not turning up to chase a job because they have ten jobs and 14,000 people looking for them, last week i was down at my job center seeking to find work, as cripples do, to be told they had 9 positions.

remind me how many council houses did the so caloled labour party build in 13 years.

Labour matters

No it does not but the site Labour matters has just given me the accolade of being banned for attacking Tony Blair for not being a socialist and not being able to see past my hate of the party.

This is because I tried to argue Tony Blair book is a load of crap written to try and make his third way look as if it worked.

I mean he was on TV this week to talk about his New Book and was really annoyed to be asked was he sorry about the war in Iraq, was he really right to go to war.

The problem for Blair now of course his third way blew up and in part was due to Labour being out of power, he did not have the guts to sack Brown, and did not have the guts to stay and fight another election, deals done in back rooms tend to back fire when the other person you did the deal with is an idiot.

We are now looking back at Labour spell in power watching Miliband squirm because everything he and the new labour lot agreed with is being put in place by the Tories, and all labour have letf is to argue for the NHS.

Problem is the country has changed many more people have private insurance and to be honest it's only the people at the bottom of the pile who are really worried over the NHS, but not really enough to fight for it.

Why not because we had thirteen years of labour privatization, and the MRSA epidemic.


Milibands lot right now are unable to say to much because he agrees in principle with the cuts being carried out by the Tories, he agrees with the welfare reforms, but has doubts about the rents, he also came out meekly about the cuts for the elderly only because the Grey vote normally would be seen as a labour vote.

What a mess for a party as the Revelation come out about the back stabbing of Blair, myself I would have stabbed him face to face, but thats not politics is it.

I do like you but leave.

Brown! Tony will you leave, "no"

God almighty we all knew something was going on in the back rooms of number 11 as our loved leaders fought over the top job, we had Miliband saying not me, we had ball's saying rubbish, Balls leaves his office and leaves all the paper work behind, which sadly shows that these people should never be allowed back into power again, but Browns whole life was about the use of the knife in the back in his climb up the ladder to the top.

I just think Labour will take a long long time to get people to accept them again, labour will need to sort out democracy within the party.

What a mess children playing the power game, I want to be prefect I will give you more sweets.

New Think tank for the left

GEER which I'm told will place the left in the center of labour thinking, it will highlight the gender problems of not enough women in politics, of race, not enough people from Minorities, it will state race gender and religion.

I spent a while reading through it and something hit me, it's more like something from the Blue labour, nothing at all about Welfare, the disabled will soon be asked or told to have their National insurance number tattooed onto their arms, and maybe wear a nice picture of a wheelchair on our shirts jumpers or jackets and report to a police station once a week.

This new think tank looks a lot like many of Labours blogs people who are looking to catch the parties eye to end up being asked to come on board a nice jobs as a adviser, or can you stand in a nice safe seat for us.

I was reading a bit about how labour see the next secretaries task once he or she well he takes over, first job will be according to the so called left will be to ensure donations pour in from people so labour can stop taking from the Unions, of course what that means is the new person must push like hell to get state funding.

Nothing would make me look at Labour at the moment and decide I would want to vote for it.