observer Posted August 14, 2014 Report Share Posted August 14, 2014 Seems the Government is to introduce an inspection scheme for GPs surgeries - fair enough. BUT, if they fail the inspection, they could end up being closed - thus even less GPs to serve a growing demand. The reason being given, is to empower patients with the choice of GPs surgeries, but they already have that power to change surgeries if they wish; with less surgeries there will be less choice - surely? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evil Sid Posted August 15, 2014 Report Share Posted August 15, 2014 Think closure is a last resort. They will be given whatever help they can use to improve them first. A lot depends on what the criteria is for a "good" practice and a "bad" practice. Most people I know would not really know the difference as long as they got to see a doctor when they were "ill" they would not care. Bit like "good" politicians and "bad" politicians really. "bad" politician one who is found to be taking "bribes" etc. "good" politician one who is not found out to be taking "bribes" etc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davy51 Posted August 15, 2014 Report Share Posted August 15, 2014 Thin end of the wedge for private doctors if you ask me. The surgery i go to is staffed mainly by locums who seem to do a good job ,but i think most people prefer to see a regular doctor of their own choice. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted August 15, 2014 Author Report Share Posted August 15, 2014 Well we're seeing the privatisation of the NHS by stealth and the closure of local provision, under this Gov; so perhaps, just another excuse for cuts? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boris1066 Posted August 15, 2014 Report Share Posted August 15, 2014 Well we're seeing the privatisation of the NHS by stealth and the closure of local provision, under this Gov; so perhaps, just another excuse for cuts? It might be closer than you are aware. An ongoing "consultation " by the EU crashed when tens of thousands of 38 Degrees members fed into an EU consultation on TTIP - the trade deal that would enshrine privatisation of the NHS and allow big corporations to sue our government. But the numbers of us writing in caused ‘technical problems’ and their site crashed. hursdaygovernment. But the numbers of us writing in caused ‘technical problems’ and their site crashed. "38 degrees" is I guess, an action group. You might glean further info by googling their site. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
asperity Posted August 15, 2014 Report Share Posted August 15, 2014 38 degrees is an organisation that tries to build pressure groups against anything it doesn't agree with. 38 degrees is supposedly the critical angle for starting an avalanche, sounds like a bit of "made up" science to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Freeborn John Posted August 17, 2014 Report Share Posted August 17, 2014 38 Degrees, in spite of claiming to be nothing to do with politics, comes over like the Provisional wing of the Green Party (sometimes referred to as the Watermelon Party because they're green outside but red inside) and therefore I wouldn't trust them an inch. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wolfie Posted August 17, 2014 Report Share Posted August 17, 2014 38 degrees is open to anyone of any political persuasion. What they stand for is dictated by its membership, it merely asks people to email politicians if they feel strongly about an issue. It's what most people should be doing but generally can't be arsed, and if it gets MP's to think before they act then I am all for it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted August 17, 2014 Author Report Share Posted August 17, 2014 Are we sure these "pressure/lobby groups" are representative of wider public opinion? After all, they appear to have got us into the mess we're in now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Freeborn John Posted August 17, 2014 Report Share Posted August 17, 2014 A large part of the town is restricted to 20mph under pain of criminal prosecution, and its residents have even paid through the nose for the privileged, due to the activities of a typical pressure group. Unelected (unelectable in fact) self righteous zealots who get their own way by going straight to the elected self righteous zealots, neatly bypassing all that public opinion stuff... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wolfie Posted August 17, 2014 Report Share Posted August 17, 2014 No one said that 38 degrees is representative of the wider public opinion, they are representative of part of public opinion that may also be the wider public opinion. However If the wider public opinion continue to say and do nothing then they can hardly blame those that do something. I would argue that if someone like 38 degrees had highlighted the 20 mph issue to the masses then the decision may well have been different. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davy51 Posted August 18, 2014 Report Share Posted August 18, 2014 Should 38 degrees actually be 38 % which is about the percentage of the electorate that turn out at voting time ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wolfie Posted August 18, 2014 Report Share Posted August 18, 2014 There you have It in a nutshell Davy, 62% couldn't care less. Any organisation that can get even part of that 62% interested is ok by me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted August 18, 2014 Author Report Share Posted August 18, 2014 Unfortunately, the experience over the last few decades has been of minority pressure groups taking us off on trivial and superficial tangents; with a loss of the fundamental plot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wolfie Posted August 18, 2014 Report Share Posted August 18, 2014 The thing is that if an MP gets a petition from a so called minority pressure group asking for a rethink over a certain policy, he has a number of options. 1 is to ignore it and be accused of ignoring the views of the public, or 2. publicise the bigger petition from the majority pressure group. Unfortunately the bigger petition just like an honest politician doesn't exist . It's all very well a few dozen coming on this forum moaning about 20mph speed limits, but how many actually write to their councillor or mp to complain about it. Minority pressure groups will always exist because the majority don't give a toss. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boris1066 Posted August 18, 2014 Report Share Posted August 18, 2014 Unfortunately, the experience over the last few decades has been of minority pressure groups taking us off on trivial and superficial tangents; with a loss of the fundamental plot. You need to read George Monbiots article on the subject (2013) Things have moved on since then and now Vince Cable is in the driving seat and was the target of the 38Degrees petition currently listed as over 750000 participants). I'm not sure what stage the treaty is in but is sounds like the "fundamental plot" is a crock of you know what ! Anexcerpt of the article is below. They have good reason to ask. The commission insists that its Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership should include a toxic mechanism called investor-state dispute settlement. Where this has been forced into other trade agreements, it has allowed big corporations to sue governments before secretive arbitration panels composed of corporate lawyers, which bypass domestic courts and override the will of parliaments. This mechanism could threaten almost any means by which governments might seek to defend their citizens or protect the natural world. Already it is being used by mining companies to sue governments trying to keep them out of protected areas; by banks fighting financial regulation; by a nuclear company contesting Germany's decision to switch off atomic power. After a big political fight we've now been promised plain packaging for cigarettes. But it could be nixed by an offshore arbitration panel. The tobacco company Philip Morris is currently suing Australia through the same mechanism in another treaty. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted August 18, 2014 Author Report Share Posted August 18, 2014 Just a thought - do they have this problem in China? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
algy Posted August 19, 2014 Report Share Posted August 19, 2014 Things haven't changed much around here then, the topic quite sensibly started by Obs who quite reasonably commented about the Government introducing an inspection scheme for GPs surgeries and now we are on about some 'crank' group by the name of 38 Degrees, Philip Morris suing Australia and Obs is in China. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted August 19, 2014 Author Report Share Posted August 19, 2014 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davy51 Posted August 19, 2014 Report Share Posted August 19, 2014 Topical drift ? Just like the Gulf Stream. But apparently Britain has to pay some American firm £ 200 million for a contract that has been cancelled. I missed what it was to be honest ,but it had nothing to do with doctors. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evil Sid Posted August 20, 2014 Report Share Posted August 20, 2014 I had a chinese doctor once, wats sup yu. trouble was an hour later i wanted to see another one Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davy51 Posted August 21, 2014 Report Share Posted August 21, 2014 My wife had to go to the doctor's yesterday for an injection & was confronted with " would you mind answering a few questions" . Would she mind contacting the doctor instead of A&E , would she mind phone consultations ,& would she like to be resuscitated if circumstances required it . Just a few of what she was asked ,presumably the resuscitation was to do with getting the bill if the system was privatised. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted August 21, 2014 Author Report Share Posted August 21, 2014 Sounds like the NHS is NFR. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wolfie Posted August 21, 2014 Report Share Posted August 21, 2014 Why was she asked if she would 'mind contacting the doctor instead of A&E' if she was already at the Doctors? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davy51 Posted August 21, 2014 Report Share Posted August 21, 2014 For future use, if an emergency arose at home,contact the doc first who will probably send you to A&E anyway. Probably a paper shuffling exercise to make us believe the doctors will be taking some work off the over stretched A&E. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.