Yesterday’s announcement by this Govt about winter beds was really devious and dishonest.
The message they were sending to the public was ‘we are investing in the NHS to prepare for Winter’
The reality was quite the opposite…
1/7
Their goal is to push the NHS deeper into a spiral of failure and boost the private sector. But the public won’t stand for it. So they need to look like they are strengthening the NHS without actually strengthening it in anyway.
So they announce “£250m for 5000 extra beds for winter”!
On the face of it, great! We need more capacity to handle winter. We need more like 20k but 5k is better than nothing.
But it isn’t more capacity. It’s just more beds. Actual beds…
And only 900.
And only by April 2024
Typically, announcing an expansion in bed capacity means an expansion of the NHS - beds, staff, consumables, investigation capacity. So to expand the bed base by 5000 would mean expanding the staff numbers and consumables and CTs, etc…
But this is a capital investment not an expansion of the NHS budget. A capital investment means money into the infrastructure itself.
Imagine then, more patients but the same number of staff and scanners, etc…
The money to staff the beds will have to come from the current NHS budget. The actual staff will need to come from the already diminished staff pool. Or depend more on agency staff.
The overall effect is to weaken the NHS. Stretch it even further.
So Sunak and Baker put out the announcement as if they are helping the NHS but actually they will break it and it’s staff even further. But they got their good NHS PR; they convinced some of the public that they care about their health and access to healthcare.
As I say, devious and malicious. As it stands, NHSE is heading for another catastrophic winter. Like last year, thousands will die who don’t need to. But we can’t say we haven’t been warned. And we can’t say the govt had no time to prepare. They simple chose not to! Unforgivable
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
The issue is the 28-day to diagnosis versus the 2-week wait target.
That is, if your GP suspects cancer, from the point of referral, 75% of patients should be diagnosed or given the all clear in 28 days
🧵
Currently, if your GP suspects cancer and refers for a test or specialist appointment 80% should have received their test or appointment within 2 weeks.
Currently less than 60% do. In 2010 it was 90%.
There are some advantages to the 28-day target, mainly in regards to the focus being on diagnosis versus receiving “just” a test or an appointment.
But (and it is a big but) many diagnoses are reached within the two week wait already.
Apparently according to these “impartial” journalists there is no need to worry when for the first time in the history of the NHS, more trainees are leaving the NHS than staying.
Look at the graph:
2012 - 66% stayed
2021 - 66% left
And there isn’t a f’ing problem???
And apparently a 40% jump in doctors seeking a certificate to work abroad since the Tories pummelled the NHS staff with real terms pay cut after pay cut.
5 policies that show why the Scottish govt will not privatise the NHS…
and why in England the U.K. govt already has
🧵
1. Free parking
I know, on the grand scheme of things it sounds minor. “So what, patients have to pay a few pounds to park at hospitals?”
It’s the exploitation. Like airport parking but much much worse. There is no choice. If sick you have to attend the hospital.
2. Free prescriptions
There is a big misconception that the NHS is free (or even fully funded through taxation). You often hear the ignorant suggesting Europe has part private payments and we don’t. It’s nonsense. We pay a lot out of pocket!
Monday was another damning day for the government at the Covid Inquiry.
It is becoming clearer what the recommendations from the Inquiry are likely to be…
But there is also a bigger question raised about criminality…
1/n
TUC union, the BMA, the Health Foundation, and The British Red Cross gave evidence.
Many of the govt defence positions were weakened.
The TUC Union provided evidence that public service spending was cut by 24% per capita in the decade leading up to the pandemic.
Evidence was provided to show that demands for healthcare increased 2% per year but bed capacity fell and the number of nurses only grew by 0.2%. The Inquiry seems to be engaging the govt’s meaningless statement that “highest number of doctors and nurses”
If you are wealthy, you may think that if the U.K. switches from an NHS-model to a private model of healthcare it will either a) be better for you, or b) will not affect you.
Here is why you are wrong…
🧵
The main arguments for switching models to an insurance based one are that
1) “the wealthy will not subsidise the poor”, and that…
2) the wealthy can simply pay for the best treatment when they need it.
Neither premise will be borne out if govt policies are fulfilled
Firstly, the tax-burden even if an insurance model is brought in will likely remain unchanged or go up - we will not get a tax rebate or reduction.
Primarily because a state health system will always exist and likely cost around the same level (£3.5k/person/year).
The U.K. had one of the longest lockdowns in the world, and this was due directly to Johnson’s decision-making…
Thread
Lockdowns were incredibly costly.
But what many don’t understand is how costly lockdowns were depended on how well a government responded to the pandemic.
England spent 213 days in lockdown. This was the 3rd longest in the world (Second only to Ireland and Northern Ireland, 227 & 223) [Source: Statista, Oct 21]
Crucially, this excludes local regional lockdowns. For example, London had a further 99 days of lockdown in Winter 20/21.