Cameron: "Cuts will change our way of life"

[Jose Jones]

Obviously a few Tories have got it in for that Hilton fellow, and to be fair he seems like a bit of a knob.

So UK growth for the last quarter was exactly the same as Greece.

Great job.

[Stu Monty]

But perhaps his most ambitious unfulfilled plan was to scrap maternity rights. “Steve thinks that they are the biggest obstacle to women finding work, because companies know they are required by law to offer maternity leave,” said one Whitehall insider.

 

 

Yes, that's it, he's really fucking concerned about women not being employed, he's all heart actually.

 

The massive fucking cunt.

[sparta7]

I saw that earlier, Den. It's almost as if he wasn't aware of the rate of joblessness for 16-24 year olds. Fuck it, get 'em down the coal mines and leave the learning to the kid's of the rich and powerful.

 

Every time I think of Digby Jones I think of what a cunt he is. Then he opens his fat smug fucking gob and makes me realise I completely underestimated just how much of a cunt he is.

[sparta7]

"Steve Hilton, David Cameron’s enigmatic strategy director, has startled colleagues by proposing the abolition of maternity leave and all consumer rights legislation, as part of an initiative to inject life into Britain’s sluggish economy."

 

I didnt realise enigmatic meant "Twat"

[Strontium]

Every time I think of Digby Jones I think of what a cunt he is. Then he opens his fat smug fucking gob and makes me realise I completely underestimated just how much of a cunt he is.

 

 

He is an absolute idiot and moron. I will never understand why Labour ennobled him.

[Whelan]

He is an absolute idiot and moron. I will never understand why Labour ennobled him.

 

Lots of strange ones under Labour

 

Paddy Ashdown - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[Horus]

You can't cut your way out of recession. We need to increase spending in infrastructure, and get people back to work to increase government revenues, and get money going through the system.

 

The roads are a fucking disgrace, why not get a campaign to improve all the roads across the UK creating x number of jobs.

 

Working class people spend all the money they have in order to survive, cutting the money they have, puts less into businesses and other services. This halts the economy, it doesn't help it.

[Whelan]

This isn't about getting out of the recession, it is about imposing a neo liberal ideology. Cameron wants to put on his CV that he was the Conservative Prime Minister who finally nailed the NHS and the Welfare State.

 

Nothing they have said or done so far suggests they have given any thought to the development of society that will be left when the 'deficit' is reduced. They just want a smaller, public sector and lower taxes for their kind.

 

Look at America, that will be us in ten years time.

[Horus]

This isn't about getting out of the recession, it is about imposing a neo liberal ideology. Cameron wants to put on his CV that he was the Prime Minister who finally nailed the NHS and the Welfare State.

 

Unless we get out of recession, then he will only ever be a one term PM. Taking more away from the people that need it most has already marked his card. The only way to turn this around for him, is to get people back to work, and the country out of recession. If he tries to disband the NHS in his first term, without political capital, then people will take to the streets and riot.

 

We need a genuine liberal party in the UK, with liberal policies.

[Strontium]

Lots of strange ones under Labour

 

Paddy Ashdown - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

 

Paddy Ashdown is one of the greatest statesmen this country has. He could also kill you with his bare hands.

 

Anyway, it was us who selected Paddy for the Lords. Digby Jones was hand-picked by Labour and raised to the peerage so he could serve as a minister in the Labour government.

[Whelan]

Paddy Ashdown is one of the greatest statesmen this country has. He could also kill you with his bare hands.

 

Anyway, it was us who selected Paddy for the Lords. Digby Jones was hand-picked by Labour and raised to the peerage so he could serve as a minister in the Labour government.

 

You live your life within the small print!

[Stu Monty]

I'm taking a liking to the Lib Dem that has been on Newnight a few times recently. He's standing up for his actual opinions and not staying mute on Tory policy powered by ideology and not logic. I quite liked his idea about cutting taxes on home improvement, the incentive being that people are spending on something they see as an investment, not a luxury, and it gets money flowing into the hands of tradesmen.

 

The tory on the same show thought less regulation and a cutting of tax for top earners was what we needed. Obviously, the despicable cunt.

[Section_31]

The tory on the same show thought less regulation and a cutting of tax for top earners was what we needed. Obviously, the despicable cunt.

 

Reading the 'America bout to run out of cash' thread the other day I was struck by something quite shocking. I think the only people I'd be willing to go to war against, to risk my life to fight, are these people, the Reaganomics cunts who have - under the lie of patriotism, freedom and self-determination - literally sought to jettison whole sections of society while they wallow in their wealth and let corporations run riot over absolutely everything. It's financial fascism, nothing less. The tragedy is that it will only end when things quite literally collapse.

[lifetime fan]

NHS managers are deliberately delaying operations as they wait for patients either to die or go private in order to save money, according to an official report.

 

Patients are waiting longer to be operated on by the NHS Photo: ALAMY

By Martin Beckford, Health Correspondent

10:00PM BST 28 Jul 2011

198 Comments

Health service trusts are “imposing pain and inconvenience” by making patients wait longer than necessary, in some cases as long as four months, the study found.

 

Executives believe the delays mean some people will remove themselves from lists “either by dying or by paying for their own treatment” claims the report, by an independent watchdog that advises the NHS.

 

The Co-operation and Competition Panel says the tactic is one of a number used by managers that “excessively constrain” patients’ rights to choose where to be operated upon, and damage hospitals’ ability to compete for planned surgery.

 

It claims unfair practices are “endemic” in some areas of England and pose a “serious risk” to the Government’s drive to open up the health service to competition.

 

But managers, who are already rationing surgery for cataracts, hips, knees and tonsils, say they must restrict treatment as the NHS is under orders to make £20 billion of efficiency savings by 2015.

 

Lord Carter of Coles, chairman of the panel, said: “Commissioners have a difficult job in the current financial climate, but patients’ rights are often being restricted without a valid and visible reason.”

 

Katherine Murphy, chief executive of the Patients Association, said: “It is outrageous that some primary care trusts are imposing minimum waiting times. The suggestion that it could save money because patients will remove themselves from the list by going private or dying is a callous and cynical manipulation of people’s lives and should not be tolerated.”

 

Since 2006, NHS patients who need routine elective care have had the right to choose between at least four hospitals including privately-run units. But there have been claims that trusts, the local bodies that pay for treatment, restrict choice and favour some hospitals to balance their books. The panel investigated whether the allegations were true.

 

It found “many examples of PCTs excessively constraining patients’ ability to choose, and providers’ ability to offer routine elective care services”.

 

Managers restricted GPs’ ability to refer patients to some hospitals by imposing “caps” on the number a provider would be paid to treat and by imposing minimum waiting times, its report said.

 

Under government targets, patients should be treated within 18 weeks of referral by a GP. But even when surgeons could see them far sooner, the study found that some trusts made hospitals wait as long as 15 weeks before operating. The tactic forced private hospitals, which were more likely to be able to treat patients quickly, to operate as slowly as overcrowded NHS units in an “unfortunate levelling down”.

 

Some managers insisted that longer waiting times would lead to overall savings as “experience suggests that if patients wait longer then some will remove themselves from the list”. Interpreting this statement, the panel noted: “We understand that patients will 'remove themselves from the waiting list’ either by dying or by paying for their own treatment at private sector providers.”

 

It said that minimum waiting times should only be used as a “last resort” and told trusts to publish their policies on the home page of their websites.

 

The panel also found that trusts tended to give elective business to their local NHS hospital, rather than allowing choice, in order to ensure its other services such as casualty departments remained financially viable.

 

The findings come as the NHS is under pressure from increasing demand and tighter budgets. Waiting times have lengthened since last year’s general election and more trusts are increasing the number of procedures of “low clinical value” they turn down or insisting that patients’ conditions worsen before they are seen.

 

Labour yesterday unearthed Treasury figures that show health spending totalled £101.985 billion in 2010-11, down from £102.751 billion in the last year of Labour, despite David Cameron’s pledge that “the money going into the NHS will actually increase in real terms”. The Tories pointed out that the fall represented the last part of the previous government’s five-year spending plan.

 

Ministers welcomed the competition panel’s study. Paul Burstow, the care services minister, said: “This report illustrates exactly why we need to modernise the NHS and increase choice for patients.

 

“Trusts will want to take a hard look at practices in light of this report and ensure they are always in the best interest of patients and the taxpayer.”

 

Under the Health and Social Care Bill, which has been watered down in the face of opposition from the medical profession and Liberal Democrats, power to buy treatment will be handed from trusts to new bodies led by GPs.

 

The new Clinical Commissioning Groups are intended to be more accountable to patients, while the number of sectors where choice and competition apply is being extended. David Stout, director of the NHS Confederation’s primary care trust network, said: “Today’s report rightly acknowledges that each situation will be different and the extent that any benefits outweigh the loss of choice should be considered on a case-by-case basis.”

 

He added: “Commissioners will still be left to decide the right course of action when faced with trade-offs between patient choice and value for money. The suggestion that many current trust decisions are not justifiable on these grounds is largely unsubstantiated by the detail in the report as the CCP has not investigated specific cases in detail.”

[lifetime fan]

But, but, but...that nasty Labour party...

[Section_31]

They did something similar with local authority spending too as I recall.

 

NHS Spending: Labour Accuses Government Of Transferring Cash From Poor To Rich | Politics | Sky News

 

 

Labour has accused the Government of transferring NHS spending from poorer areas to rich ones and worsening inequality.

 

The opposition party says figures from a previously unpublished report reveal places such as Manchester, Liverpool and County Durham will lose cash.

 

More affluent places, such as Surrey, Hampshire and Oxfordshire are set to gain. They are also traditionally Conservative areas in contrast to the Labour-dominated north.

 

The figures are due to a change in the way Primary Care Trusts are allocated resources and the weighting given to "health inequalities".

 

Health inequalities relate to the differences in people's backgrounds which mean some areas have a lower life expectancy, more smokers and higher obesity rates.

 

 

They will make it harder to prevent the big killers like heart disease and cancer, and increase the cost of poor health for everyone in the long run.

 

John Healey, the shadow health secretary

By changing the weighting from 15% to 10%, less wealthy towns will receive less funding.

 

John Healey, the shadow health secretary, said the figures were "shocking".

 

He said the changes will hit services that help people stop smoking, promote healthy eating and raise awareness of sexually transmitted diseases.

 

"They will make it harder to prevent the big killers like heart disease and cancer, and increase the cost of poor health for everyone in the long run," he said.

 

There is also the political dimension to the funding decision as the areas left worse off tend to be Labour heartlands or marginal seats.

 

However, the Conservatives say an independent panel found there was no "technical basis" for the weighting for health inequalities to be higher.

 

They also accuse Labour of scoring an "own goal" and say overall NHS spending is higher under the coalition than it would have been under Labour.

 

The report was produced by Public Health Manchester for the health select committee, a panel of MPs from across the different parties.

 

TEN BIGGEST LOSERS:

Tower Hamlets -4.1% (Constituency has Labour MPs)

Manchester -4% (Predominantly Labour)

Newham -3.6% (Labour)

Liverpool -3.5% (Labour)

City and Hackney -3.3% (Labour)

Nottingham City -3.2% (Labour)

Knowsley -3.1% (Labour)

Barnsley -3.1% (Labour)

Hartlepool -3.0% (Labour)

 

BIGGEST WINNERS:

Surrey +4.2% (Conservative)

Kensington and Chelsea +3.9% (Conservative)

Richmond and Twickenham +3.8% (Conservative and Lib Dem)

Buckinghamshire +3.6% (Conservative)

Berkshire West +2.9% (Conservative)

Bromley +2.9% (Conservative)

Hampshire +2.9% (Conservative)

Wiltshire +2.7% (Predominantly Conservative)

Dorset +2.7% (Predominantly Conservative)

West Sussex +2.7% (Conservative)

[clangers]

They did something similar with local authority spending too as I recall.

 

NHS Spending: Labour Accuses Government Of Transferring Cash From Poor To Rich | Politics | Sky News

 

Really not right that is it? Tories are saying all areas are getting a similar increase trouble is the proportionate increase seems to be much bigger in areas that you'd imagine don't have quite the same demands on health and spookily enough seem to be Tory heartlands. Are we seeing the start of building a feel good factor for the Tories heartlands at the next election? Seems to be a pattern forming after a similar deal for local government?

[Section_31]

Really not right that is it? Tories are saying all areas are getting a similar increase trouble is the proportionate increase seems to be much bigger in areas that you'd imagine don't have quite the same demands on health and spookily enough seem to be Tory heartlands. Are we seeing the start of building a feel good factor for the Tories heartlands at the next election? Seems to be a pattern forming after a similar deal for local government?

 

Thing is, I don't see how the idea of getting more money than 'up north' would be a vote winner, unless you were an absolute cunt you wouldn't want to think you lived in a country that deliberately hurt the poor. I think it's more a case of 'ideology' if you can call it that. The policy makers will no doubt say that, instead of helping people lose weight, stop smoking etc, that it is their presonal responsibility to do it themselves. Expect to see people who don't comply having benefits or the right to operations withdrawn sometime soon.

[clangers]

Thing is, I don't see how the idea of getting more money than 'up north' would be a vote winner, unless you were an absolute cunt you wouldn't want to think you lived in a country that deliberately hurt the poor. I think it's more a case of 'ideology' if you can call it that. The policy makers will no doubt say that, instead of helping people lose weight, stop smoking etc, that it is their presonal responsibility to do it themselves. Expect to see people who don't comply having benefits or the right to operations withdrawn sometime soon.

 

I wouldn't disagree that ideology comes into it but that's exactly the point. The Tories are not going to be fighting for cities like Manchester or Liverpool at the next election. They are propping up their core support and sending a message to them along the lines of 'we're not going to prop up those lazy working class self-abusing types' etc. Minimise the impact of the cuts for their core support has been their mantra since day one of the government.

[Kevin D]

We're going to help all those who financed us and to hell with everyone else.

[Section_31]

I always find it funny how Eric Pickles used to be a Communist until the Soviet Union invaded Czechoslovakia? At which point he joined the Tory Party. It's nice to know some people's grasp of ideology isn't skin deep.

[L19red]

But, but, but...that nasty Labour party...

 

I'm sure I just heard Vince Cable on the news say that the meerkat turbulance is global in nature. I'm confused now because other liberals are adamant that the Labour Party is to blame.

[Strontium]

I'm sure I just heard Vince Cable on the news say that the meerkat turbulance is global in nature. I'm confused now because other liberals are adamant that the Labour Party is to blame.

 

 

It's quite simple.

 

- Global market conditions are out of our hands.

- The UK's response to those market conditions is the responsibility of the UK government.

 

It's like if you have lions in the zoo. The zookeepers can't do anything about lions being vicious predatory carnivores, because that's the nature of the beast, but they are responsible for building cages that are strong enough to hold the lions.

 

If the lions get out of their enclosure and eat all the visitors, nobody blames the lions, because that's what lions do; they would (rightly) blame the zookeepers who didn't adequately protect people from being eaten.

[Whelan]

It's quite simple.

 

- Global market conditions are out of our hands.

- The UK's response to those market conditions is the responsibility of the UK government.

 

It's like if you have lions in the zoo. The zookeepers can't do anything about lions being vicious predatory carnivores, because that's the nature of the beast, but they are responsible for building cages that are strong enough to hold the lions.

 

If the lions get out of their enclosure and eat all the visitors, nobody blames the lions, because that's what lions do; they would (rightly) blame the zookeepers who didn't adequately protect people from being eaten.

 

That is bollocks and you know it!

 

Labour caused the recession through the economic policies of the Labour government and the global economic downturn was ignored, now the economic policies of the coalition government will be ignored because of the economic global downturn.

 

At least have the decency to shrug and say 'whacha gonna do'!

 

Lets see what the Lib Dems do about this!

 

Osborne plans to cut 50p income tax rate - UK Politics, UK - The Independent

[L19red]

It's quite simple.

 

- Global market conditions are out of our hands.

- The UK's response to those market conditions is the responsibility of the UK government.

 

It's like if you have lions in the zoo. The zookeepers can't do anything about lions being vicious predatory carnivores, because that's the nature of the beast, but they are responsible for building cages that are strong enough to hold the lions.

 

If the lions get out of their enclosure and eat all the visitors, nobody blames the lions, because that's what lions do; they would (rightly) blame the zookeepers who didn't adequately protect people from being eaten.

 

and what have the hypothetical zookeepers been doing for the past 15 months, because if we extend your metaphor there would have been riflemen on the streets within hours shooting them nasty lions.