Jump to content

Blood for Sale?


Geoffrey Settle
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 82
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Does anyone know anything about the proposal to let big business profit from blood donations :?:

 

just checked all the news sites and no mention of it there..... it would be an idea to boost stocks though I guess

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looks like the Left-wing professional Anti's are foaming at the mouth - without, of course, giving any details of the plan they're opposing, or the problem they have with it.

 

If a business were to take on the collection, processing, storage and distribution of blood - and do it to a higher standard and at a lower cost than the current bureaucratic public sector solution - then where's the problem with them making a reasonable profit at it?

 

Or should all companies, suppliers and contractors involved in the health service be benevolent charities staffed only by unpaid volunteers?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lots of people are employed by charities - they all make money out of other people's charitable donations.

 

Currently, lots of people are employed by the NHS Blood Transfusion Service - they don't do it for free either!

 

Nobody is talking about paying donors or charging the NHS for blood (although every year the NHS does still pay through the nose for blood products from overseas).

 

There are costs involved in collecting, processing, storing and distributing blood donations, costs met by the taxpayer. If a profit making company can do that at a lower cost to the taxpayer than the public sector can, then where's the problem?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If a private company started to make profit on my donations I would stop giving

 

By the same argument you should also stop giving to ANY charity (assuming that you do) because they ALL pay staff salaries and bonuses, professional fund-raisers comissions, PR companies, advertising agencies and product suppliers, as well as overseas bribes, facilitators, armed guards, fixers and any number of other profit making organisations - all out of your donation.

 

The profit in this case is not on the blood, it's in doing the job of collecting, processing etc. which the taxpayer is currently paying the public sector to do, but doing it cheaper than the public sector are doing it.

 

If the public sector were doing it efficiently then there'd be no scope for anyone to come in and make a profit by doing it cheaper. But if they're not, or if they won't, then they deserve to lose the business to someone who will.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with Inky. The Blood Service already uses private companies for transport services and this is just an extension of this. If the cost of the service can be reduced and therefore give a better, cheaper service to the NHS then that is what should be done. Typical "beggar my neighbour" attitude from LtKije. :roll::roll::roll:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No what inky said was

it's in doing the job of collecting, processing etc. which the taxpayer is currently paying the public sector to do

 

What asp say's is

The Blood Service already uses private companies for transport services and this is just an extension of this
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do work for Oxfam, I do not get paid :!:

 

Oxfam directly pays salaries to over 6000 people in 80 countries - all of whom profit from the public's charitable donations.

 

In the UK alone, their current advertised vacancies include:-

 

a "Head of Digital Communications" on around ?50K pa.

 

an "Executive Assitant" on ?35K

 

a "Public Affairs Coordinator" on ?30K

 

a "Legacy Marketing Manager" on ?40K

 

and any number of other posts in the same sort of salary range. (looks like the charity business is booming!)

 

In addition, they also contract with DialogueDirect, a profit making company which employs professional doorstep fundraisers. The fundraisers are paid a salary plus a commision, the total costs are equivalent to virtually all of the first years contributions made by anyone who signs up to donate via monthly direct debit.

 

I'm not picking on Oxfam - that's just the example you cited - all charities do this kind of thing because they recognise that by spending this money and employing experts for fundraising and other tasks they can do MORE of their charitable work than if they were a pure volunteer organisation. But at the end of the day, it's all paid for out of the cash donations that members of the public think are going straight to starving kids in Africa, or wherever.

 

The possible privatisation of the blood transfusion service is a similar case. Employ professionals to do the job, and it might well get done better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No what inky said was
it's in doing the job of collecting, processing etc. which the taxpayer is currently paying the public sector to do

 

What asp say's is

The Blood Service already uses private companies for transport services and this is just an extension of this

 

So currently, the taxpayer pays the public sector, the public sector employs a manager or six (plus probably a "diversity co-ordinator", a "policy and compliance co-ordinator" and half a dozen "outreach workers"), and then sub-contracts the job out to the private sector anyway!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, LtKije, you would rather the NHS spends money on an inefficient Blood Service, money it could use in other areas, just because of your dislike of anything to do with the private sector? If the private sector can provide as good a service for less money then what is your problem? After all when we donate blood we don't ask them what they're going to do with it do we? :wink::wink:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How do you know it is inefficient :?:

 

If it's currently being run as efficiently as possible then there's no scope for private enterprise to come in and make a profit - so nothing will change.

 

If, on the other hand, the current service is wasting my money and yours on overstaffing, inflated salaries and pension contributions, then there may well be a business which can do it cheaper and still make a profit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If, on the other hand, the current service is wasting my money and yours on overstaffing, inflated salaries and pension contributions,

 

So you think cutting pay, and cutting pension contributions is an efficiency saving, You are just transferring the cost to the government, If you pay them less they pay less tax and get more tax credit, ie the government pay, If you take them out of the government pension, in the long run the government pay as they have to support them in old age. As they already work for the government there is no need. So thats how the private sector work cut pay and pensions as they know the government will support them as they are low paid and have know pension. I will not give my blood to a private company to make money on, I like the fact that the staff are qualified.

 

I hope no one comes into your place of work inky and carries out one of your efficiency savings out on you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

LtKije I really think you need to read up on the proposals. There are no plans to change the arrangements for the collection of blood, so you won't have to pay for your tea and biccies, and the nurses and support staff will be the same loveable vampires. What is being looked at is the transport and storage of blood and products. TNT is already used extensively in the transport part. As Inky said, if there are no savings to be had there will be no change. Typically there has been an overreaction from the usual suspects who are too busy being outraged to look at the facts :wink::wink::wink:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share


×
×
  • Create New...