A short measure of public esteem for the Liberal Democrats is the length attached in the media to the Rt. Hon. Vincent Cable MP’s name, and the longer, the better. When fully expanded in all its parts, the LDs are in full sail, before a soldier’s wind. Vincent says they are still making good way, but Vince tells of head winds, and when crimped to Vic, stormy seas are close ahead. The day it’s V signals nothing’s left, and that’ll be the day for those who value survival to abandon ship.
Dr No mentions this barometer of public esteem since it seems to him that, while Michael Foot may have written the longest suicide note in political history, the LDs are now engaged in the longest suicide act in political history. Education and health are the twin pillars of a decent society, and having already stabbed themselves in the spleen of education, the party are now lining up to pierce themselves in the heart of health. The commodification of higher education, by establishing what is little short of a ruinously expensive insurance-in-arrears scheme, was a cynical stunt; to sit back idly while the Tories do much the same to health is a stunt too far. The British public will neither forget nor forgive. Come the next election, we shall see Clegg put back in his rightful place, a poodle in his own back yard.
Yet there are those who have had and continue to have high hopes for the political process. We have had campaigns directed first at MPs, and now at peers. There are those who still think that Dame Shirley of the Short Hair has a bold plan to stick a cold finger up the rear of the coalition’s privatisation plans. Stuff and nonsense, says Dr No! The truth is, as we have already seen, that Owen has hit the fan; and a glance at last Tuesday’s Lords’ Hansard reveals many fine words, but precious little result. The Icarian wax that binds the coalition together has yet to melt; and we will see the Bill on the books before it does.
There is a postcard doing the rounds at present. Its message is that it will not do for doctors to sit idly by while governments – all of them, but most horribly, the coalition – destroy the NHS, and all that it stands for. This pleasingly recalls and reinforces a point Dr No has made before, and makes again now, and will make again in the future.
Which is this: Labour are in the long grass, and the lust for power has poisoned the once good intentions of the LDs. The Tories will hold sway, and the Bill will be enacted. And so it is that today the NHS is hanging by a thinner cable than ever before in its history. Soon that cable will thin to a thread, and then that thread shall fray and snap. Unless – and only unless – the one group that has the power to wreck the Bill – GPs, and, yes, the patients they counsel – do what they must do, and wreck this ruinous Bill.
The HSCB has already passed it’s second reading in the Lords as I thought it would – because it’s key recommendations are already midway in emplementation [to include putting docs in charge which is a good thing] so scrapping it would’ve caused a major upheavel to the NHS. What I hope will happen now is that the Lords will uphold the PMs 5 personal pledges which he made last June, they were:
DC first said There will be ‘No Americanisation of the NHS’ then;
1- That it remains a universal service free at the point of delivery
2- endeavour to keep low waiting lists
3- Maintain spending
4- No privatisation
5- Aim for and maintain proper co-ordination of care
If the Lords succeed in tweaking the bill until it does just that, then we’ll all be fine … and live happily forever after!
🙂
I have no doubts that the bill will be enacted as some/many Lords (as MPs of any hue, family and friends of said Lords and MPs) have their fingers firmly and greedily stuck in private health provider pies and of course some in the medical profession have sticky fingers too
Will there be any amendments – possibly not for there is much spin, much clever talk and all those sitting (apathetically) on the fence will do just that. The bill will be passed and probably be fleetingly mentioned in the disinterested (or politically guided) media.
The general public will remain torpid or probably more accurately uninformed and like sheep accept the unacceptable. I fear that they are not aware of the power they hold to elicit neither change nor the need to.
Several years ago I asked my GP to refer me to a specialist of his choosing – he said he could not do that as due to ‘Choose and Book’ I had to travel this path myself and he could in no way influence this as I would lose Patient Choice – even though my choice was that he refer me to someone who he trusted and respected. Sheep that I am, I accepted this and did not demand that he refer me to the right specialist – but would he have been able to anyway?
So, to some extent Patient Choice – or the illusion of it – has existed for years – so will we notice a difference? There will be no hue and cry.
Regrettably I fear many GPs will be as accepting for there has not been a mighty protest. Surveys and polls would suggest that most GPs are against the HSCB – but as the sum total of those taking part – either as selected or independently responding are so few of the grand amount – do they give a valid and reliable account of true opinion. I fear there are many sheep dressed up as GPs.
Pessimistically yours,
Anna :o]
PS The LDs lust for power will certainly be their downfall – a fine example of sheep accepting the unacceptable.
Can I suggest that you look at Jonathon Tomlinson’s latest blog post and if you’ve adopted a lord, to contact them?
http://abetternhs.wordpress.com/2011/10/30/briefing-3/
Julie – Dr No has done more or maybe less than that – but to give details might enable T’Lords to determine DN’s identity. So he is careful – but accepts always that one day his name will out.
You can brief peers until you are blue in the face – because blue is the way it will go. The arithmetic, the law, and the feebleness of the LDs mean it will go that way. Time spent briefing peers is wasted time. Far better to set ourselves up for the real fight: what to do when the Bill is law, and every alternate TV/paper ad is for top up insurance, and every second cold call offers bigger and better health care.
Anonymouse – DC promised no top down reorganisation – and then organised one ‘so big you can see it from space’. Surely it is reasonable to take his puff with a pinch of salt?
“DC promised no top down reorganisation – and then organised one ‘so big you can see it from space’. Surely it is reasonable to take his puff with a pinch of salt?”
Time to move on Dr No … and the conservatives firmly believe there is no top down reorganisation but quite the opposite since they want to hand over power to the docs 🙂
Dr No spotted that Machiavellian twist some time ago – but didn’t mention it for the obvious reasons. But the fact is: it is top down. It’s La La and Cammers who are driving this ‘so big you can see it from space’ reorganisation (and you can’t get more top than that), not grass roots GPs like JD or GP leaders, like CG.
“(and you can’t get more top than that)”
Yes you can, you can ‘impose’ an American system … but we have a pledge from DC this won’t happen, so let’s give credit for that, if only for the sake of fairness
“not grass roots GPs like JD or GP leaders, like CG.”
Why the no mention of ‘hospital doctors’, senior as well as junior, and their leaders too? … vital when you have a pledge to strive for ‘quality’ as in co-ordinated care [pledged] and an essential factor if you want to cut waiting times [pledged] … not forgetting ‘accountability’ either [currently vague] … and there you go, best prescription for effeciency at best cost too!
… but, the Lords debated nothing about what the bill has for ‘doctor training’ in that 3.5 hours session of the second reading! Maybe they will later, because nobody seems to know much about that so far! Hopefully ‘the Lords’ won’t allow the future to be forgotten as everybody else does, hopefully …
Zizek (the ‘puck of the pomos’) tells a well-known anecdote about Niels Bohr; Surprised at seeing a horseshoe above the door of Bohr’s country house, a visiting scientist said he didn’t believe that horseshoes kept evil spirits out of the house, to which Bohr answered: ‘Neither do I; I have it there because I was told that it works just as well if one doesn’t believe in it!’ This is how ideology functions today: nobody takes democracy or justice seriously, we are all aware that they are corrupt, but we practise them anyway because we assume they work even if we don’t believe in them.
The campers at St Pauls who I visited last week are teaching us an important lesson; “Badiou was right to say that the name of the ultimate enemy today is not capitalism, empire, exploitation or anything of the kind, but democracy: it is the ‘democratic illusion’, the acceptance of democratic mechanisms as the only legitimate means of change, which prevents a genuine transformation …”
“the ultimate enemy today is not capitalism, empire, exploitation or anything of the kind, but democracy: it is the ‘democratic illusion’, the acceptance of democratic mechanisms as the only legitimate means of change, which prevents a genuine transformation …”
Reading that, one would’ve thought you are a sceptic from somewhere in the ‘Arab spring’ region, and there are many who think the idea of attempting democracy there is an illusion that has a huge potential to end in disaster! Is that scepticism going global then? … frightening new world where ‘order’ is no more as ‘chaos’ becomes the new order of the day
Anonymouse – Any more pledges and Mr Cameron will turn into house polish!
Dr No mentioned only JD and CG not to exclude others, but because JD and CG are well known and on record, and CG, through her surveys, is a conduit to the views of other GPs, the great majority of whom neither asked for nor wanted the Bill. The Bill also started life with only GPs on CCGs, although that itself being an absurdity so big it could be seen from space, the coalition quickly agreed to involve other doctors and other clinicians.
The coalition have in fact already partly attended to medical education – by racking up the tuition fee cap, which will hit medical students with their extra long courses extra hard.
The noble Lords did in fact produce a lot of noble hot air about education and training (see Hansard here (Amendment 2) and in subsequent pages), much of it on the lines that the Bill was weak on this side of things. Unsurprisingly, the difference between a minster holding a body (Health Education England) to account, compared to having direct responsibility, came up, but without obvious conclusion. We shall have to wait and see whether it comes up again more conclusively in today’s debate.
JT – a very interesting point about the ‘democratic illusion’. Our approach today appears still locked to the Churchillian way (worst form of government except all the others that have been tried), notwithstanding his appreciation of its capital defects (best argument against democracy is a five minute conversation with the average voter). If we go back to Aristotle (as Dr No did here and here), we can remind ourselves that in that original account, democracy was indeed described as a deviant form of government. The problem today, as it has always been, is how to bring about the non-deviant form.
Anonymouse – having just saved my comment, have now seen yours. The Arab Spring has indeed thrown a sharp light on the risks and defects of democracy (in particular, the effects of one particular (say religious) group gaining power through a legitimate democratic process, ie open and fair election, and then abusing the power so gained). But then again democracy, even if illusory, is surely better than real despots and real dictators – and so we end up back at Churchill.
Perhaps this is over simplistic, but I think for most voters in the UK, democracy simply means going the polling booth every four years or so and placing a cross on a piece of paper. No more than that.
Witches and black cats don’t really understand what democracy really means, but like most voters we both think we understand the meaning of freedom, although that can be very complicated too as one person’s freedom may be another’s bondage.
Perhaps political discussions should dwell on the true meaning of “freedom” (and then add in “honesty” and “compassion” too), and consider ways that freedom does not degenerate into the chaos of anarchy. We should continue with the polling booth, but maybe ditch the term democracy, for this term that everyone can at least partly understand.
This website has given me much knowledge and confidence.I really like this site.Thank you very much for this nice and beautiful site.
cable tray