Coffee House

2014: the year of ‘hard truths’ that are easy for George Osborne to say

6 January 2014

8:57 AM

6 January 2014

8:57 AM

George Osborne has a funny way of saying ‘happy new year’. In his speech in Birmingham this morning, the Chancellor will describe 2014 as the year of ‘hard truths’ about how much more spending needs to be cut in order to close the deficit. So why is the Chancellor kicking off what most commentators are billing as an extremely long general election campaign with a bleak message about more cuts to come? In 2010, the three main parties did everything they could do avoid talking about the detail of the challenge on public spending. Now the Chancellor wants to make it his main weapon against Labour, knowing that voters have been ahead of politicians on supporting deficit reduction, that Labour’s main poll weakness is the economy, and that this focus on tough choices and economic credibility will spook Labour into making more awkward contortions over formerly pet projects and policies in order to give the impression of fiscal responsible.

And yet in his choice of the working-age welfare budget as yet again the focus for the spending cuts – the Chancellor told the Today programme that ‘I think we do have to look at the welfare budget because I think it would be an odd choice as a country to say, “look we’ve got a high deficit and we’re going to deal with that by just cutting the schools budget or the science budget or something like that” and to leave untouched this enormous welfare budget’ – Osborne suggested that he isn’t prepared to talk about the really hard truths either.

[Alt-Text]


He cannot talk about the pensioner benefits while the Prime Minister is ‘minded’ to make the same pledge about protecting them in 2015 as he did in 2010. These will, as the Chancellor argued, only save a small amount anyway, but as Osborne well knows, politics is about signals, and continuing to refuse to address universal pensioner benefits while hacking back at universality and eligibility for other benefits looks inconsistent. Incidentally, some of the cuts that he suggested in his interview have already been introduced by the Coalition: he said ‘there are people, for example, on incomes of £60,000 or £70,000 living in council homes – I’d look at that’. But the Communities and Local Government department already has – introducing a policy called ‘pay to stay’ whereby social landlords can raise their rents for higher-earning tenants.

But if Osborne is only interested in the big savings, as he told the radio this morning, then perhaps he could consider some of the ‘hard truths’ about other areas of spending. Conservative MPs have made repeated calls for their party to reconsider its commitment to ring-fencing the NHS budget, with Liam Fox reiterating that demand last week. But though public spending increases in the Labour years did not lead to massive improvements in service provision, there is still an omertà on senior politicians making these kinds of noises about the NHS budget. It is politically unpalatable. 2014, it seems, will be the year of only the ‘hard truths’ that Osborne doesn’t find it too hard to talk about.

More Spectator for less. Stay informed leading up to the EU referendum and in the aftermath. Subscribe and receive 15 issues delivered for just £15, with full web and app access. Join us.




Show comments
  • Colin56

    This is not a serious Chancellor, he’s a posh boy playing at it. We are still borrowing £100bn a year which we cannot afford, which we have little or no hope of paying back and on which the interest payments alone are crippling the economy. Take an axe to international aid, scrap the NHS ring fence, slash benefits, leave the European Union. Reduce the number of Civil Servants by 40% – and the pay of the remainder by the same. Make constituencies larger so fewer MPs – reduce their salaries to national average. Make Scotland independent so the Barnet formula can stop once and for all. And don’t even think of HS2 – there’s just no cash in the bank.

    • RavenRandom

      Blimey because he’s well educated and from a wealthy family he’s a “posh boy playing at it.” Is being well educated and wealthy a hindrance to management and thought? Or is it merely your expression of unblinking thoughtless prejudice?
      Conversely if he was a badly educated poor boy (from a poor family) would that increase or decrease his or anybody’s chance of making the right decision?

      • the viceroy’s gin

        Who says the muppet is “well educated”? That’s his problem (well, in addition to him being an insular poshboy): He’s poorly educated and has zero real world experience.

        • Colin56

          He ‘received’ a good education but whether any of it sunk in is up for debate. Your key point is that, like most of today’s robot politicians, he has zero experience of the real world – running a business, holding down a real job, making things for heavens sakes. And it shows. He is widely regarded as being a skilled politician – but that is an empty boast in a job where running something – the economy, for example – is a key performance indicator. On that basis, he’s useless. But not perhaps as Brown was.
          The real despair sets in when one considers ‘ who else is there to fill his shoes?”.

          • the viceroy’s gin

            No, he didn’t receive a “good education”. He received a poor education, even if it did sink in. Any muppet can get through what this muppet did.

            And since you’ve added it, what makes you think this muppet is a “skilled politician”? On what basis do you make this claim? The guy has done absolutely nothing of consequence politically, other than rise by the hand of fellow poshboys. The Cameroons struggled to take a plurality against one of the most hated politicians in the Western Hemisphere, and will shortly get blasted out of power by a set of clueless muppets. What of that implies “skilled politician”?

            No, this numpty is exactly what it says on the label. He’s a poorly educated, bereft of experience, politically tone deaf, jelly faced poshboy.

    • Fergus Pickering

      Tell me, O wise one, who was a serious Chancellor? Could it have been Broon, the comprehensive boy who saved the world? And what has posh got to do with it. Since osh people are generally better educated than yobs, it ought to be a plus point surely.

      • Makroon

        You’re not paying attention Fergus – look at his “manifesto”. He’s not referring to Broon, he’s referring to ‘slasher’ Farage, the new model chancellor who will get elected by promising to take a razor to the NHS. Apparently.

    • Makroon

      Yes, that sounds like an election winning manifesto from UKIP. Yawn.

      • Colin56

        WTF is the problem with that if it’s the right thing to do? And would win an election? Try dropping your fascination with obsolete party labels and get real about what the country actually needs.

        • the viceroy’s gin

          You needn’t bother trying to convert these Camerluvvies. They’re determined to split the UKIP vote, and put the Millipedes in power.

  • MikeBrighton

    Here is a hard truth for Osborne. He isn’t even serious about cutting public spending whatever the spin. He has cut public spending by 1.1% over 5 years (to current budget plan). It’s less than a rounding error.
    The Tories are just not serious or competent. It’s a matter of time before the markets realise the government is just not serious about the debt or deficit and then the trouble really starts.

    • Makroon

      Hmmm, that must be why bond yields dropped by 6 points today after Osborne’s speech.
      The funniest thing today was to see that carping idiot Johnson from the IFS questioning Osborne’s figures – the exact same bloke who created a minor sensation in the Daily Mail, earlier this year, by saying Osborne needs to make another £60B of cuts. Doh !

  • Magnolia

    We’re in deep trouble as a country.
    The government are steering a path through the economic mire by cutting state spending and raising taxes, perhaps?
    A lot has been done by stealth, such as extending the pension age and lowering the tax bands for some, a public sector wage freeze and council tax freeze etc.
    A picture is starting to emerge to me of an open country where the elites control everyone else because they will not only be the richest but they will also have the greatest opportunities to move around socially and economically.
    This is because a smaller and smaller share of all taxes are being paid by the richest people.
    This must buy power and is presented as a wholesome ‘good’ thing by our masters.
    This group is already cliquish and has closed minds to free thinking independent ‘outsiders’.
    The result will be increased social inequality which will naturally swallow up the middle classes as well as the ‘poor’ because it will surely lead to an economic dead end.
    It will be a disaster because the loss of freedom (in social and economic terms) for the majority will lead to increasing stagnation and rigid working experiences and further enriching of the ‘elite’ that will eventually lead to the majority very much ‘losing ‘ in the so-called ‘global race’.
    We are in a vicious circle of economic decline which is being managed by financial means only.
    We need a new framework for wealth creation.
    The Conservatives are not offering one at present.

    • Pip

      The result may well be revolt.

    • dalai guevara

      fundamentally right.

      • Makroon

        Fundamentally wrong. Exactly the opposite of the facts actually.

    • DWWolds

      It is not true to say that a smaller and smaller share of all taxes are being paid by the richest people. 1% of the population contribute 29% of the tax take.

      • Magnolia

        I might have made a mistake there.
        According to the Daily Mail, the top 1% of earners paid about 30% of all income tax this year compared to about 20% in 2003.
        http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2451686/Top-1-earners-pay-THIRD-income-tax-year.html

        However this excludes other forms of tax such as VAT, capital gains tax, stamp duty etc.
        I meant to say that a smaller and smaller share of the population are paying for a larger and larger part of our taxation, although I admit that I do not know if this is wholly true. That might be a good thing in more buoyant times if the ‘proceeds of growth’ were shared with the majority in the form of tax cuts and higher wages but not at present when that must mean that the rest of society are getting left behind or need hand outs.

  • dalai guevara

    “…introducing a policy called ‘pay to stay’ whereby social landlords can raise their rents for higher-earning tenants.”

    Unbelieveable – another argumentum ad absurdum. Only in Britain could someone come up with something as ludicrous as this and sell it as a vision to ever-inflating prosperity.

  • AnotherDave

    “Middle class welfare” (including pensioner benefits) should be the first items on the list.

    http://www.reform.co.uk/content/5423/research/welfare/the_moneygoround

    • Pip

      Any debate about reducing Pensioner Benefits when the Government continues to allow millions of Immigrants and EU Migrants access to the Welfare State and Public Services, who have never paid anything or enough into the system is as immoral as it is Politically suicidal. The Communists behind the EU, BBC and LibLabCon will be ousted soon and punished.

      • the viceroy’s gin

        That’s a good point. The immigrants are a front line of defense for the welfare state. Cut them off, and you can then begin to cut off other excessive welfare state burdens.

        • dalai guevara

          How’s life in Winnipeg, tovarishch? Defenseless [sic] against the undeniable effects of climate change imported from abroad?
          Oh sorry, I ought to have asked for some nutter to translate your gibberish for me.

          • the viceroy’s gin

            …we’ll need that gibberish translator here, socialist comrades.

    • Fergus Pickering

      Because all pensioners are middle class, eh?

  • RavenRandom

    On a somewhat unrelated topic, I congratulate Isabel Hardman on a great 2013. I don’t always agree with her, but her work rate, the sheer number of interesting articles and comment impresses me. So thank you, and keep it up. (Feel free to delete if it’s too far off topic.)

  • HookesLaw

    Yet who are the most vulnerable – pensioners who cannot help themselves by working or those of working age for whom its plain there are ample jobs for them to take up?
    Why do you always want to stick the knife into pensioners at the Spectator?is the govt doing anything wrong in saying it will help the most vulnerable those who have spent a lifetime paying in to the system?

    • Trowa Barton

      There is no ‘system,’ that’s the whole point. Any money that pensioners paid into N.I. has already been spent (years ago), and penalizing everyone else for their lack of foresight sets a pretty bad example when it comes to personal responsibility. Everyone should work on the assumption that the state won’t pay them a pension and plan accordingly..

      • Fergus Pickering

        Maybe it doesn’t, but we were repeatedly told that it did.

        • the viceroy’s gin

          …and if you believed it, then you’re like any other sucker. LibLabCon thrives on socialist suckers.

          • dalai guevara

            No, it’s called profiteering, sponging off subsidies, supersizing the big state by adding a quango layer.
            That cannot be done in an environment owned by the people. That can only be done in an environment increasingly owned by others, by the Chicoms for instance.
            Your ideology will eat y o u next, tovarishch.
            Now get your translating software out…

            • the viceroy’s gin

              No need bothering with that socialist gibberish. Let the suckers deal with it. They enjoy socialist gibberish.

              • the viceroy’s gin

                …oh good Lord, more gibberish is on the way.

              • dalai guevara

                Those socialists are *landlords*, they NEED the housing benefits to come thru, otherwise they will kick you out.
                That’s on the news right here right now – you wouldn’t know defenseless [sic] in Winnipeg or some other godforsaken place. You ain’t got a clue cowboy.

                • the viceroy’s gin

                  …yep, more socialist gibberish it is, and best ignored.

                • dalai guevara

                  Suck the milkshake, suck my shale, suck for dismal quango advice, suck maximum benefits – LANDLORD benefits, how much benefits can these fat cats suck? Suck suck suck!
                  Who’s paying for all this. Correct, the British taxpayer, we all are paying for your fat cat sucking of benefits, amigo.

                • the viceroy’s gin

                  …can any of you envirowhackos tell me whether this socialist gibberish is recyleable? We could actually become the first ever to make socialist kookery pay off.

                • dalai guevara

                  Can any of you buy-to-let whackos tell us why anyone should give a excrement about the occupany rate of your sheds with beds? Not to building regs? Single glazed? Cellars in which you keep your g!mp with no fire doors? How disgusting. Tear them down!

                • the viceroy’s gin

                  …because if socialist gibberish is a profitable recycle, we’ve got the mother lode of socialist nuttery churning it out right here, baby.

  • Holly

    Unless they do something tangible about who is allowed to come into the UK, George Osborne can say what he likes.

    I watched the Cameron interview yesterday up to the bit about child benefit being paid and sent abroad, Cameron ‘thought this was wrong’, blah, blah, blah…
    Well I’m sorry, but you have been in the top job for the best part of four years and with the backing of many of your backbenchers, Gove, May & IDS, you should have by now, AT LEAST put it to a vote in our Parliament! You would then have sent a message out to those paying the bill you are serious about what goes on here in the UK.

    The tide and mood has swung away from the three stooge parties, and the rage many feel about uncontrolled immigration, or the fact that, because of rules & regulations made elsewhere, we have lost our ability or right to control it.
    The British are tolerant, but the politicians, media and accusations of xenophobia/racism have kept us all quietly raging…That has now changed, and we WILL(or will not) vote accordingly, and be heard.

    What we need to run alongside fixing the economy is a fistful of commons votes, to flush out what each party really think.

    I was furious at Cameron, especially if he thinks he can delay what is absolutely necessary now, until after any re-negotiation, and the referendum in 2017.

    All three main parties are in deep trouble, UKIP is not just a TORY problem.

    • Vernon Goddard

      Agree with your sentiments here. I, too, saw the interview and was appalled at how easily Mr Cameron glossed over his own inadequate responses to the issues of immigration. What has he been thinking about for the last few years? The truth is, pressed by a move of voters to UKIP, Mr Cameron and other party leaders are waking up to the reality of a possible poor show in the European elections in May. When are the parties going to respond to the public on this issue?

      • Holly

        I am not appalled. I am angry.
        Angry that for years the public opinion on immigration has been taboo as far as the government that instigated it, were concerned, and the MSM for banning any air time to it.

        While I am angry at the main parties, I am sick of the sight of Farage.
        What HE needs to do, and fast is, get the potential UKIP Chancellor, Home Secretary, Education Minister, etc in front of the TV cameras…
        For questioning.

        Everyone and there dog knows what Farage is about, but he can no sooner expect to get votes if he continues to stifle other important voices in the party.

        I reckon most people will have decided which way they will vote by September, so any bods reading this are welcome to pass it up the food chain.

      • the viceroy’s gin

        Clearly, they’re not going to respond to it, ever. In fact, they insulted everybody in December, with a non-response, at the 11th hour, to the latest immigration wave crest starting in mere days.

        LibLabCon does not intend to respond. Ever. Afterall, why should they respond to plebs?

    • dalai guevara

      I will be your devil’s advocate now, given that no one is stepping forward. The following might sound radical to you and others, please excuse words that have not yet sunk in.

      No one, absolutely no one, supports the call for a referendum.
      Not Labour. Not the LibDems. Not any (!) Tories, as the Afriyie kerfuffle clearly demonstrated.
      You need to demonstrate that what you call “absolutely necessary” IS actually that and then explain why.
      Then, when you have done that and have gained a majority in the House, only then, might someone be inclined to listen.

      • Holly

        Absolutely necessary now…
        NO benefits.
        Can not come ‘looking for work’, must have already got a guarantee of work, and the stay will only be as long as the job exists.
        In short, WE, as a country decide who can come here.
        Not Europe.

        On one hand many moan about youth unemployment, and on the other moan that ‘forcing’ them into low skilled jobs is looked upon as a human rights offence.
        We really do have some hard choices to make, and waking up is one of them. Another is, do we want our young people to work, with all the misery of venturing out on days like today, to do the same boring cr@p, and all the benefits of money, friends, and socialising, and hopefully moving on to a better job, or do we want to let others do the jobs and get on?
        We as a nation have to decide. Not all jobs are well paid or fun, but it is much better than being idle, bored, and blaming others for the boredom.

        • dalai guevara

          Happy to take the hit here.
          Let’s just look at one aspect: housing. When the rock bottom is reached as you appear to suggest, people will begin to pick up bricks themselves and build their own abodes. How difficult can it be?

          A new shoe box home retails at £200k+ today! Why? It’s just a shoe box, for Pete’s sake. What is wrong with Britain, why are we forever putting trust into big corporations to find they are only in it for the profit? A home does not n e e d to cost that – 50 years or so ago we had groups upon groups of our youth building things. They were busy, they were skilled, we had an interest in training them.

          Look at Britain now. We do not want to train our own offspring, we will rather import those skills or dumb down all processes to such an extent that anyone with two left hands could do it.

          This is no joke – this is the story of post-war Britain, the deskilling the working classes and then importing that skill for cheap from elsewhere. That, dear friend, is the ideology of Thatcher’s Britain (no, I am not Peter Kay) in a nutshell. The damage it has done is immense!

  • RavenRandom

    First off the Chancellor is right, we still have a very large budget deficit. Second politically the NHS is a religion, you mess with that at your peril. Third it’s a contrast, every Miliband one off issue (as Labour have no coherent policies) he brings up all ends up with Labour promising more money.
    It’s a long campaign, he is saying “We have a plan, the economy is healing, it will continue to heal if we continue to apply the medicine, but let’s not let Labour go back to the policies that nearly killed it.”

    • HookesLaw

      The NHS is going through 20 billions of savings. Despite being ring fenced its budget like all health care budgets is under pressure.
      The way the nutjobs go on you would think they, their wives, their parents, their children are immune from any illness. Cutting the health budget is fine for all these people – but just wait until someone they know and love is ill, their opinions of what is important will change then.

      • RavenRandom

        Agreed. Cutting the health budget is political suicide. The problem is that it is very likely that a centrally run state organisation with a budget greater than £100 billion and over 1.2 million staff is very inefficient. How you get more for your tax pounds is a problem as every reform, especially by Conservatives, is called a cut, privatisation or worse.
        We have deified the NHS to the point that any attempt to make it better is always condemned. The implicit idea therefore is that it must be perfect now.

        • Jambo25

          Actually, I was under the belief that in terms of ‘bang for your buck’ the NHS is a very efficient system for health care delivery. Certainly far more so than insurance based systems such as the one operative in the US.

          • HookesLaw

            NHS management costs are relatively low. The NHS is as I said going through a 20 billion efficiency programme. There is no doubt the NHS wasted money under labour. That is just another reason not to let them back in power.

            • Jambo25

              At some point in time efficiency drives simply have to end otherwise you end up cutting services as well as administrative costs.

              • the viceroy’s gin

                Well, they have to start before they can be made to end, all Camerluvvie jabbering notwithstanding.

                • Jambo25

                  They’ve been cutting for a couple of years now.

                • the viceroy’s gin

                  How so, if the Cameroons claim to have “ring fenced” affairs? Surely they’re not lying.

          • the viceroy’s gin

            Yes, MidStaffs very efficiently killed those people, didn’t they?

          • Nicholas chuzzlewit

            And this belief is based on what? Have you direct experience of US medical care? For all of its imperfections, they do not suffer the kind of criminally negligent and disgraceful circumstances that prevailed at Mid-Staffs. Mid-Staffs being the tip of a particularly terrible iceberg. The kind of smug, sanctimonious rubbish that you peddle: “the wonderful NHS may not be perfect but it is far better than those awful Americans” based on fatuous supposition. It adds nothing to a debate about a difficult issue where the manifest failings and inefficiencies of the NHS need to be confronted.

            • Jambo25

              The US spends much more as a %age of national income on health care but have no better outcomes than the UK. If Mid Staffs is the tip of a particularly terrible iceberg: you will, of course, have proof of that.

              • the viceroy’s gin

                …actually, if you check, the 5 year survival rates for many types of cancers are much better in the US, and there are no hospitals killing thousands of patients, to my recollection.

                That guy for whom the Speccie has an obituary up today? He died of pancreatic cancer, at a youngish age. That disease is often successfully treatable in the US, if caught early, but the NHS is thought to often parry early interventions, meaning the 5 year survival rate drops accordingly. That disease can be a killer if left untreated or treated too late.

                • Jambo25

                  There are also areas of disease in which the USA lags behind the UK. There are also recurrent health scandals as well. In addition life expectancy and infant mortality rates ( The prime health indicators) are behind those of the UK.

                • the viceroy’s gin

                  There aren’t many areas of disease in which the US would lag the UK. If you can name them, I’d be interested.

                  You’d have to describe these “recurrent health scandals” you’re mentioning.

                  Infant mortality rates are skewed in the UK. The US counts all infant mortality, and takes great pains and expense to preserve infants once they’re born, much more than the UK. Meanwhile, the UK just lets them die pre birth or at birth, and counts them as not having been born, as both a cost savings measure and a statistical manipulation, much like the measures taken re cancer treatments as mentioned above.

                  Life expectancy isn’t a prime health indicator, not as used to gauge health care functionality. Some people seemingly want to die, and engage in high risk behaviors accordingly. The key is what happens when people require health care, and that’s where the US outperforms.

                • dalai guevara

                  Every area vicedude. In every area the US lags behind.
                  Why? Because you are looking only at those insured.
                  D’oh!

                • the viceroy’s gin

                  More unsupported socialist nuttery.

                • dalai guevara

                  No matey, I built a hospital or two – everyone always loves the States. Flashy images, cool reception lobbies, a hospital, the new shopping mall.
                  For those with the dollar, matey. Only for those with the dollar.

                • the viceroy’s gin

                  More unsupported socialist gibberish.

                  We need to get that recycle operation prototyped. This nutter is a gold mine.

                • dalai guevara

                  That’s the idea matey.
                  To cure you from ruminating stuff you once read in the Daily Mail. That won’t work here.

                • the viceroy’s gin

                  Now there’s a thought of value, for once. The Daily Mail can probably cure people better than the socialist nutter NHS. Let’s check the worldwide 5 year cancer survival rates:

                  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cancer_survival_rates

                  Hey, the frickin Daily Mail can’t do much worse than the very worst system in the Western world, can it?

                • the viceroy’s gin

                  …and I mean, it’s the worst by a very large margin, not just by a little bit. The socialist nutters have really outdone themselves, obviously. And then there’s Mid-Staffs…

                • dalai guevara

                  Mate, the story of your life – you only get out what you put into it.

                  Do you have any idea how much money the French, Germans or Americans for that matter spend on healthcare per head (only those insured, please)?
                  It is a entirely different world, not comparable, a different planet in fact. You m u s t understand that simple reality. For that reason alone will I not belittle the NHS, never mind all the waste I have seen.

                • the viceroy’s gin

                  Heh. More socialilst gibberish, with a little whimpering poured on top.

                  I think you’ve finally got a winner here though, comrade. Send the entire socialist nutter NHS staff to Guantanamo, and hire the Daily Mail to run it. Instant improvement. Maybe it’d even advance beyond Belarus. One can hope.

                • the viceroy’s gin

                  …and I bet the now-deceased Mid-Staffs patients would have found the Belarus komissars more humane, come to think of it.

                • dalai guevara

                  Ok, lets go mid range here, not the top – France, Germany, the US. That would be Germany, the US exceeding everyone by far.
                  Do you have any idea what the Germans spend on healthcare? 15% of taxable income, matey. 15 per cent. How much is that per annum for you? 15%!
                  There an MRI scanner in virtually every village. When you pay that kind of money, no problem.

                • the viceroy’s gin

                  We’re not talking about other countries, lad. We’re talking about the worst performer of them all…. the socialist nutter NHS… the one that seemingly sets out to kill patients.

                  Now, if you socialist nutters want to benchmark against countries actually NOT failing, have at it. You’ll find they don’t allow you socialist nutters to hold sway. That’s job one.

                  They also build coal fired power plants. You know, once again scorning greenie socialist kookery. See the trend, lad?

                • dalai guevara

                  Not my experience, mate.
                  I know, nights are long in Winnipeg, you read about what goes on over here but you cannot see never mind experience what goes on. Two entirely different things.

                • the viceroy’s gin

                  …is this fantasy supposed to be of value, lad?

                • dalai guevara

                  Mid-Staffs, hilarious. You only read and *believe*, never actually go anywhere to check anything yourself do you?

                • the viceroy’s gin

                  The beauty of Mid-Staffs, for you socialist nutters, is that it prepares the social soil out in the land, for the inevitable deaths occurring in the camps you socialists will eventually open, when you acquire full control.

                  Those deaths have a conditioning purpose, in the larger socialist picture. They always do, for you types.

                • dalai guevara

                  Matey, all that money you saved by not spending on healthcare. Save it up. Put it in the bank, no wait… put it in bitcoin, haha.
                  That will generate a nicely sized money pot. Then get yourself a private nurse or two in old age. You know it makes sense…

                • the viceroy’s gin

                  …and that’s ultimately what you socialist nutters want… full control… over everything and everybody… and their lives and life… in their entirety. You socialists seek full control. You desire the ability to kill at will. That is the proven history of socialists. It’s what you types do.

                  Mid-Staffs had a purpose, however unspoken and unwritten. It is to condition the populace to the killing required to fully form a socialist society. You’ll find this purpose spoken and written in every socialist movement’s activist base, but in first phase execution, it has to be couched in less harsh terms, and attributed to “accident”. I give you Mid-Staffs.

                  Socialism does not shirk from the required killing necessary to preserve and expand itself. It never has, and it won’t start now. The socialist killing always mounts, it never subsides, unless socialism itself is destroyed, and freedom and liberty is raised up.

                • Jambo25

                  How are infant mortality rates skewed in he UK? As for life expectancy. Well little old me would think that avoiding death was a fairly important health indicator.

                • the viceroy’s gin

                  Infant mortality was explained above. No need to explain it to you again.

                  We’re discussing health care. That means we analyze health care. Try to focus.

                • Jambo25

                  No. Infant mortality is not explained. Are you saying that the UK hides infant mortality? If so: how?

                • the viceroy’s gin

                  It was explained above. Sorry you can’t comprehend, but no need to repeat it.

      • Holly

        It is not simply the budget that is the problem in the NHS, it is the structure, the lack of good medical knowledge with those holding the purse strings at the top, and the poor quality of compassionate and good training of staff at the bottom.
        The entire behemoth is a mess.

        • Fergus Pickering

          What on earth is compassionate training? Or do you mean training people to be compassionate. What training would that be? Can we have honesty training and goodness training too?

          • the viceroy’s gin

            …well, not as long as the LibLabCon monolith is in power. Heaven forfend there would be honesty and goodness training.

          • Holly

            I mean going onto a ward and caring for people.
            Not ‘classroom’/’exam’ based.
            Hands on training, and the compassion will be there for all to see, instead of training care staff to gain a piece of paper.

            Some of the examples that have ‘slipped through the net’ have had fatal consequences, and yet some still blame the whistle-blower.

            Would those sending vile messages really want to be cared for by those who turned a blind eye, or the whistle-blower who was compassionate, and knew what was happening was wrong?
            Nursing and the caring profession is a vocation, and we need to get back to that. Weeding out the one’s who are in it for the money would soon float to the surface, and be encouraged that nursing/caring is not the career for them…Or the patients.

      • Makroon

        It gives these types a certain stress-relief to sound off about the NHS, knowing there is zero chance that their own care will be put at risk by irresponsible budget slashing. Farage is smart enough to keep well away from such nonsense.

        • the viceroy’s gin

          …and the Cameroons are well pleased with the socialist status quo, as always.

Close
Can't find your Web ID? Click here