Home » Posts tagged 'interview'
Tag Archives: interview
Cameron's Big Society is nearly dead.
Laura Kuenssberg tried to trip Ed Miliband with her pathetic little trick of saying that Labour had no plans about deficit reduction. Her message is simply a disgusting lie. Labour said it would not have cut the deficit as fast or as deep. Ed’s answer below couldn’t possibly be clearer. And on Laura Kuenssberg’s head be it when growth grinds to a total halt, unemployment shoots up and we still have no growth strategy (and the people in collusion with her such as George Osborne and David Cameron). The reason the public aren’t impressed because Nat Wei has left the Big Society as its Big Architect – maybe this fits in better with his work schedules with McKinsey’s, if he’s still working there, assuming of course any companies he works for do not have ongoing contracts with the Big Society. And it is a sham – as legal professionals may not be able to volunteer for community legal centres because of an annual cut to legal aid of the order of £2bn a year, in schools because of the illegal scrapping of BSF, or in SureStart centres because they’re being scrapped. A disaster – a contemptible one at that.
David Cameron is wrong on the NHS corporate restructuring for these reasons
In an interview where David Cameron tried to tell John Humhrys he was wrong, Humphrys identified that Cameron was showing no leadership on the bankers.
The interview can be heard here:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/today/hi/today/newsid_9363000/9363655.stm
David Cameron is wrong about the NHS restructuring for the following:
It is wrong simply to focus on outcomes at the treatment end; much more could and should be done at the diagnosis end (health policy analysts find outcomes useful, but what they’re actually measuring are objective benefits). Much of the fundamental issue for the next decade will be the early diagnosis of the disease especially cancer, and there needs to be some focus on the efficacy of screening methods at the other end too (e.g.for colon cancer, breast cancer, COPD).
It is no good just talking about length of survival times, because there has to be a proper analysis of the quality-of-life and well being of patients with chronic morbidity including dementia.
The Doctors were not asking for the changes – the BMA is opposed to it, and to my knowledge the Royal College of Physicians shows little interest in it in a very positive direction. The King’s Fund certainly think it is a calamity.
2-3 years is a very short time to produce ‘the biggest reorganisation’ in the first time; it will involve £1.4 bn in the first year. John Humphrys was right to correct the figures that Cameron produced on the basis of actual evidence from the Kings Fund.
Satisfaction is at an all time high now with the NHS – this cannot be divorced from the record spending by Labour in the last parliament.
David Cameron denied the NHS IS getting better. This must means that he thinks that all aspects of it are getting worse. THIS IS A LIE.
John Humphrys asked that the NHS was in fact changing to a Federal Health Service. Cameron saying that there are already regional variations is frankly irrelevant. Humphrys is correct saying that an analogy between GPs and free schools is an extremely poor analogy; I am shocked that David Cameron is idiotic enough even to suggest it.
There’s no point Cameron trade-union bashing, as there are many ordinary nurses, doctors and other health-professionals who are non-Labour members who are highly critical of his insane policy.
If Andrew Lansley is so well respected, why does the whole of RCN disagree with him? The man is not well respected amongst the health professionals.
Dr Shibley Rahman Queen’s Scholar; BA (1st Class), MA, Bachelor of Medicine, Bachelor of Surgery, Doctor of Philosophy, Diploma of the Membership of the Royal College of Physicians (MRCP(UK)); FRSA, LLB(Hons).
Member of the Fabian Society.
