The Nasty Labour Party - what they really stand for.

I critcise Corbyn because he is a hypocrite and don’t bother with the policies from the Corbyn/Momentum/McClusky Party .

As for leader , seems the fight is on, Corbyn v McDonald

vaguely leftwing could describe moderates, centre, slightly left of centre who are not keen on Corbyn et al.

Problem for me, Jalima is that I've never thought of myself as particularly left wing but on here I appear to be thought positively communist! It's that Overton Window effect, I think I'm sure nobody really considers themselves to be extreme.

That's why my plea is for discussion of ideas, not categorising and personalities

Who would you support for Labour leadership then trisher?

Marieeliz you can't post much on GN, Corbyn is regularly slated as are any with left wing views. Of course some on here pretend to be left-wing, but finding out what policies they actually support is difficult and in some cases impossible. And as MaizieD said those with left wing views are called Corbynistas and communists.

vaguely leftwing could describe moderates, centre, slightly left of centre who are not keen on Corbyn et al.
Who must apparently be extreme right wingers.

Perhaps I have the wrong impression from threads.

P.S That makes it very difficult to discuss ideas as people are more interested in the Corbyn hate-fest than in ideas.

However, moderate views are rarely expressed on GN because those who support Corbyn accuse posters of being right-wing extremists, so moderates tend to keep quiet.

Equally, Jalima, many people posting even vaguely leftwing views are 'accused' of being Corbyn supporters which seems to automatically ensure that their views are ignored.

I think there are many posters on here Marieeliz who would vote Labour if the present leader, most of his team and that group that backs him were removed and sensible moderates were in charge.

However, moderate views are rarely expressed on GN because those who support Corbyn accuse posters of being right-wing extremists, so moderates tend to keep quiet.

Nothing wrong with 'lefties', Marieeliz. They just have a different vision of how our country should be run. For the many, not the few, you know

What a change to see Jeremy Corbin slated on GN. I have felt the few times I come on, that it is a very Lefty site. As usual, I have friends like this, left wing people have no toleration for anyone else's opinion only there own. This is what they call Democracy. MP's are elected by the constituents and should not follow everything the Leader says, they are there to serve. Unfortunately, I live in a Labour area, they would vote Labour even if the candidate was a Money on a stick.

The 'catastrophic' privatisation of Britain’s railways has cost the taxpayer £5bn per year and driven up fares by 20 per cent, Labour has claimed.

Analysis released to mark the 25th anniversary of the legislation that privatised British Rail suggests government subsidies of the railways have increased fourfold since 1993.

And since 1995, shortly after British Rail began to be sold off, fares have increased by an average of 20 per cent in real terms, while some routes have seen a much bigger rise.

www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/trains-railways-fares-privatisation-labour-5bn-john-major-nationalisation-a8617321.html

As said, perfect, for shareholders for sure:

"That’s the standard technique of privatization: defund, make sure things don’t work, people get angry, you hand it over to private capital"

May I remind you Day6- that many of us remainers and concerned about the NHS, are NOT Labour members- or supporters.

'What we must do is holler very loudly and at every turn that value for money is provided, wherever services come from, and any corruption, inefficiency, mismanagement and squandering of funds is rooted out'

and I for one would agree with this. And yet- it has been shown very clearly that once services are outsourced, profits for suppliers and shareholders- become the new rulers. Services are sold to the lowest bidders, for the highest
profits - and often very low quality. See the thread on NHS waste being dumped, as just one small example.

Often too, private services will give good value for money and quality at first, to undermine the state service - until the state service has been destroyed- and then they can raise prices as they like- having got rid of competition.

Chomsky is so right - the theory and tacticts are always the same- and still, after so so long, people still fall for it.

Do you think the NHS, and the tax payer, got good value into the outsourcing of IT systems - the lowest bidder got the contract- without the knowledge or expertise to do the job- at the cost to NHS, and tax payer, of billions.- as as one example, again.

Always extremes - see - saw - marjory doh bl**dy doh. Why can't we have sensible discussion, sensible solutions- that work for the benefit of most?

Day6 why do you think it was necessary to use private healthcare facilities to reduce waiting lists when Labour came to power after years of Tory government. Because years of under investment had created such long waiting lists there was no other way to do it. And yes Labour did allow privatisation, but the way it is now being implemented means that we will alsmost certainly very soon have two teir service. Some of the services provided by the NHS are totally unprofitable, no one will want to privatise those. Meantime the privatised bits will pay money into private pockets, money which should be invested in services. Once someone's treatment becomes unprofitable of course they will be cast back to NHS provision.
Re-establishing public ownership of the NHS is vital.

NHS debate has become toxic, with Labour claiming to be the saviours of the service, when in fact, we have to acknowledge that there have been, for a very long time, many NHS services provided by the private sector, a bonus in terms of efficiency, shorter waiting lists and the use of new technology and equipment.

A very interesting article in the Financial Times (August 2018) points out "Privately owned “independent sector treatment centres” set up by the Labour government in the early 2000s as part of a plan to clear long waiting lists for planned operations and diagnostic tests produced “a statistically significant improvement on average for patients undergoing hip or knee replacements compared to NHS providers”,

The fear is that the NHS will be sold off and run by private companies but as mentioned in the article
family doctors, who are the entry point to the system for most patients, are independent contractors. Private companies also provide the equipment and medicines that diagnose and treat patients.

Do we really KNOW where our care is coming from, how it's funded, who bought what, which firm provided which services or drugs, etc, etc, etc?

I have many trips to the hospital as an out patient and my specialist care is I feel sure, the best of it's kind. Cutting edge, no pun intended, treatment has been available for me. I cannot afford private care, and firmly stand by our wonderful NHS and its philosophy that at point of need, care will be free, for all.

If private involvement means there is competition we should see a striving for improvement, as long as these services are scrutinised, accountable, and provide not only value for money, but methods, procedures, specialisms an equipment that would be impossible for the NHS alone to provide.

No one wants to see the NHS pulled apart, bit by bit but given there has been beneficial private input for years and years, a very well kept secret, would we really have all those contracts torn up and expect our doctors, specialists and technicians to rebuild, from scratch? There is not money for development or research that private companies provide and bring to the NHS.

There are two sides to most stories. As someone who needs and values the NHS, as I imagine all of us do, we cannot keep fighting the status quo.

What we must do is holler very loudly and at every turn that value for money is provided, wherever services come from, and any corruption, inefficiency, mismanagement and squandering of funds is rooted out. NHS administration more than anything is long due an overhaul.

All of us, not just Labour supporters, demand this.

The NHS is not THEIR cause. It's a clever ploy to blame Conservatives for privatisation of services when the very same thing was introduced by a Labour Prime Minister, and was acknowledged to work and bring more efficiency to the NHS.

www.ft.com/content/8736afde-9f20-11e8-85da-eeb7a9ce36e4

And I respect it - but would be really interested in how you come to that conclusion.

Do you really think that if the England NHS is sold off, be it to Branson or to Trump- the same would not happen to NHS Wales or Scotland?
Yes, jura, I really think that.

If the budget for Nhs England is cut then the others are cut by the same percentage
I didn't say it WAS being cut I said that decisions about it affected NHS Scotland and NI so we should all sign ...for example if budgets are cut it means ours will be too.

8paddyann* disingenuous as they say!

per year - I thought meant each year.

MaizieD it was my understanding that the increase is an average of £20 billion per year over five years, not an increase of £20 billion over the five years.

The NHS will receive increased funding of £20.5 billion per year by the end of 5 years.
www.gov.uk/government/news/prime-minister-sets-out-5-year-nhs-funding-plan

That is how I read it anyway.

Hi niggly x

and it cuts boths ways- we have seen a massive anti expert campaign won by the tabloid press. And where every true 'expert' with massive experience and knowledge, is always 'balanced' by someone with an agenda, who has not got a clue apart from their ... agenda and prejudice.

When the CEO of Nissan says that they are preparing for the worst, but won't bother to tell the Government or the public, how and the possible consequences, because they will be accused of 'fear mongering' - you have to be seriously worried.

Wait, wait, smile, we will soon enough know - is beyond belief and ... well, more.

Annie, Closet millitant!! ???????

... as Jane said on the other thread ...

This is an interesting report:

In this report we explore the evidence about whichNHS contracts are being tendered, who is winning them and how these trends form part of the new direction the NHS is now taking. Our data is based largely on a process of analysing published awards, a data base that we have compiled from observations over the last 4 years

We also review the catalogue of problems that have emerged in the various types of outsourcing that have been tried, as part of the NHS market experiment.Some of these failures have undoubtedly influenced the current changes in strategic approach and led to the widely supported view that this experiment should end

www.nhsforsale.info/uploads/images/contract%20report%20dec%202017%2028_12_17%20.pdf

Of course, it's been compiled by and anti-privatisation organisation so some of you might say 'Well they would say that, wouldn't they?' but I'll just leave it here.