Another hurdle for Lansley’s health reforms

John Montague

another “union opposes coalition” story could just be tucked away

Are you suggesting that the BMA's members stand to lose either income or other benefits as a result of Lansley's proposals? Could you specify, please?

Fergus Pickering

Or you could just junk them. My wife believes, sincerely as far as I can see, that the health reforms are all to do with Tory cabinet ministers selling their souls for big business money. She also says that since PFI is a disaster, which it surely is, that this proves private enterprise has no place in he Health Service. I have no idea about the rights and wrongs of this but she is a right wing voice and UKIP supporter so may be considered a straw in the wind. Let the NHS alone and do something else. Or even do nothing else.

purpleline

I believe we should take great comfort from this BMA policy. It shows it is much needed and is working, they are scared about losing their control. I hope Cameron keeps his nerve on this reform much needed and much overdue.

After Lansley gets this through I hope he goes on to reform the BMA as they do a lot of damage and hide a lot of poor doctors to the detriment of the patient. They are behaving as Posh Bob Crow types and need to be put in their box.

Publius

Envy of the world... (not)

Mark Cannon

Ludicrously over the top from the BMA. Mr Lansley should stick to his guns and the Prime Minister should back him.

Stephen Byrne

"Slash and burn" sounds like the usual hyperbolic squealing of vested interests. Of which, rather too much these days and months.

Anne Wotana Kaye 1

Lord protect us from lawyers and doctors.

Victor Southern

The BMA is no more than a trade union. Trade unions never accept Conservative ideas even though the BMA is dedicated to stasis.

dorothy wilson

Didn't the doctors oppose the introduction of the NHS?

And if anyone wonders whether change is needed in the NHS they should read the report by Dr Tim Morgan produced for the Centre for Policies Studies & mentioned on here a few days ago. Pages 8 and 9 are particularly relevant.

On a more general note, am I the only person to find the obdurate resistance to any kind of change that seems to be embedded our society worrying? Yes, we have much to be proud of in this country - despite Labour's efforts to destroy everything - but we also need to be open to change and innovation if we are to compete.

In2minds

The NHS is a state within a state, I'd go for drastic reform.

Scotty

Of course the BMA object to change - they got their way with labour and achieved massive unproductive salary increases for their mates and don't want to lose this gain - competition would make consultants have to work harder for their comfortable living.
Well done labour well done medical profession - the caring people, not.

langbourner

We've run out of gold to stuff in their mouths.

Anne Wotana Kaye 1

Victor Southern
March 15th, 2011 3:29pm

Report this comment

The BMA is no more than a trade union. Trade unions never accept Conservative ideas even though the BMA is dedicated to stasis.
===============================
And don't forget statins - good rewards from the drug companies.

Maggie

"..the BMA has today voted....."

Not the BMA but an unnamed coterie of delegates at "an emergency meeting of the British Medical Association". This same overpaid politically motivated lobbying group has been campaigning vigorously for the UKs 140,000 GPs to resign en masse. Don't let anyone pretend they ever have the interests of patients at heart.

TomTom

The BMA is belatedly waking up to what its members think. Lansley's plans are half-baked and put the health service right under EU control. The GATS Section of the WTO looks to privatise public services and the Bill itself opens up NHS Services to the EU Directives on procurement.

In short any EU company whether Romanian or Spanish or Hungarian can bid to operate GP services or whatever. The GPs will NOT be able to run this procurement mess so they will end up being subcontractors to US corporations or to Aviva, KKR-Boots or United Health.

Groups like Hospital Corp of America, Inc will bid for hospitals. It will be just like the electricity, gas, water utilities

Holly ......

So the BMA are against this?
Yet the BMA bod on the Daily Politics says they are in favour of GP commissioning.
Andrew Neil reckoned the Conservative manifesto did not mention the reforms yet
the Conservative bod on the programme quoted
the page number it was on.

Mr Neil was 'confused'after the BMA bod made
himself look like a Labour tart and the pollster groaned about how 'confused' the public are about these reforms.
No bloody wonder when everyone is coming out with scare stories,half truths and the usual bull.
Lansley,on Sunday, made Soppell look stupid
when he tried to use the same idiotic scare tactics.
If health care is going to be funded on outcomes for the patient,instead of box ticking death camps,who are we to grumble?

If private health care is good enough for rich bods,why is it frowned upon,by the BMA & Labour when offered to us common bods?

We are all going to starve to death bacause of VAT or be killed by a rampaging
shoplifter,anyway so what the hell!

AF

It's all well and good going for reform but do they have the numbers in the house to vote it through,sadly I think it may be a struggle,unless it's riddled with ammendments.

Andy Leeds

God I hate all this 'The NHS is wonderful' rubbish. It isn't. It badly needs radical reform. The BMA are looking to their own vested interests. But I agree with Dorothy: all this resistance to any form of reform and to new ideas and ways of doing things is deeply depressing.

Baron

have said I before, it pains to repeat it again. The construct can never work because its funding remains limited, the demand for its output ain’t. Shifting the burden of apportioning medical care to GPs is likely to make things worse, NICE will increasingly curtail who can get what, GPs will face the wrath of the patients at first hand. A more radical re-think is needed.

TomTom

"The BMA are looking to their own vested interests"

That is the most stupid comment on this board. Really stupid. Conratulations on having zero idea of what Lansley's Bill actually entails. The BMA Membership will get incredibly rich with his plans - millionaires - they will have control of £80,000,000,000 among 8500 GP practices and 30,000 GPs.

They will CONTROL access to hospitals and treatment and some will make a fortune with nearly £10 million per practice to play with. Would be funny if a few didn't shift a bit offshore - it happens in schools.

So to insult the BMA and GPs is to say how damned stupid Lansley is to transfer NHS budgets to them - exactly what the BMA is saying

Jon Stack

Lansley seems to have ignored one of the golden rules of change management: get those whom you wish to accept change to own the problem, and the solution. Any changes which are imposed will not work no matter how good or necessary they are. That's why the reforms are doomed, whatever they turn out to be after they've been given the inevitable mauling. Same goes for the changes to the police. You'd think these politicians would learn from their previous management experience. Oh, they haven 't any....

Andy Leeds

Tom Tom,

It would be funny if you weren't quite so stupid. I am fully aware of what the Bill proposes, and I damn well support it. However the BMA is not just a trade union for GP's. How many of its members are hospital doctors ? The NHS is stuffed to the doors with vested interests. The only 'interest' which is not considered is that of patients. The system was wrong in 1948 and it is even more wrong now, so reform is long overdue.

Paddy

I too hope Lansley holds his nerve over this one.

The NHS needs a good shake-up....from top to bottom.

TGF UKIP

Not a question of "if" but rather "when" the u turn will arrive.

John Redwood recently raised the question of the wisdom of going into bat for any freshly announced government policy given the probability of its early reversal.

Niffy Nog

This is precisely the same unsound doctrine that propelled the national rail network into total disarray, with excellence in areas with popular demand and complete garbage in regions that were loss-making.

This is a dismantling of NHS structures for the quest of more for less financing.

TomTom

"Tom Tom,

It would be funny if you weren't quite so stupid."

Since I am very far from stupid, I suggest you are mentally deficient. READ today's papers....GPs will be on £300,000pa with this scheme. $55,000 bonus for admin plus huge bonuses for rationing care.

Frankly it doesn't bother me if GPs end up as millionaires, I think it will be funny to hear people like yourself bleat and squeal. You are so retarded that you insult anyone who points out just what a goldmine this will be.....I know how to make a fortune out of this and I am not alone.

"Stupid" ? Oh yes you are Dimwit in Leeds because you don't know what will be coming to Leeds

Sir Everard Digby

Interesting.The sacred cow that is the NHS seems to preclude any form of rational debate. GP Commissioning of sorts was in place from 1991-97 and a bastardised version was introduced by Labour from 2005. This is not 100% new. Why would the media and political classes have us believe otherwise?

Perhaos we should try a different approach to the NHS to determine whether it is worthy of beatification; let's emasure the health index of a patient before they receive treatment and again afterwards.This would give a steer about the quality of the treatment.

TomTom

"GP Commissioning of sorts was in place from 1991-97 "

Of course it was but not with £80 BILLION and that was Pre-Devolution.

"GPs are central to the government's programme, and by 2013 will have to band together into consortiums before being handed £80bn of NHS funds to commission care for their patients.

At the heart of many doctors' concerns lies the possibility that, under the reforms, GPs' pay will be linked to rationing patient care; in essence, being rewarded for saving the taxpayer money"

Gabby Julie

"NICE will increasingly curtail who can get what"

They won't Baron, because NICE has been divested of its powers to regulate prescription drugs. That power will go to the consortia in the area and what drugs are available will vary from consortia to consortia. But you're right, the access to many drugs will be curtailed and the GPs will get the blame.