How do they get from £34B down to £20.5B with inflation at around 2%? 
Westminster Politics
- Thread starter altodevil
- Start date
2018/19 budget was 114.6 billion. At 2% inflation the 2023 equivalent would be 126.5 billion. The government is projecting a 2023/24 spend of 148.5 billion. 148.5-126.5 = 22 billion.How do they get from £34B down to £20.5B with inflation at around 2%?
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
I for one am shocked.
Better get to A&E right now mate. If you leave it too long then you might have to pay to upgrade your place in the queue.
Seriously though, Where's the press outrage for this one? They're more than happy to pay lip service to the NHS until it's at risk or, you know, staff go on strike because they see the whole thing falling apart and want to raise awareness to it (probably hoping that folk don't just claim it's down to them wanting more money).
Classic Lib Dems. Tory enablers.
Lack of press coverage is shocking but not something new. Many stories that would make the public more pro Labour are not being covered. Press are complicit.
Politics these days is depressing. This was a regret motion, you can read the wording yourself. It wouldn't have repealed the Health and Social Care Act, or introduced any new legislation, or anything like that.
The only reason Labour did this was because they knew the Lib Dems wouldn't support in. Then they could put it out on social media for their supporters to get indignant over, safe in the knowledge that most people don't actually look at the information behind the claim. An exercise in disinformation.
Since we're accepting Labour propaganda now as the unchallengeable truth, here's what the Lib Dems say.
ie there was other stuff in the amendment they didn't agree with, so they abstained.
But you know, it gave the Labour culties their daily shot of anger, so well done.
Er....yeah I know. This is where I first hear about it -
https://morningstaronline.co.uk/art...h-amendment-protect-nhs-further-privatisation
Its was nothing more than a gesture, so that case wouldn't did the lib vote for it ?
They really don't help themselves
And
Health act means the death of the NHS as we know it - https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/mar/30/health-act-means-death-of-nhs
Last edited:
It's the thought that counts.
If you knew, it's a pity you shared that tweet that made it out to be something its not.
In this case, not really. Even if this was somehow binding, it suggested repealing a piece of legislation that's central to how the NHS and social systems work with literally nothing to replace it. For better or worse, its the legislative framework that the NHS works on you can't just delete it and move on. Anyone being remotely sensible would consider that a bad idea.
yeah but it’s easier to just say the Lib Dem’s are tories amirite
Which is it for you ?
Er....
Can't wait to hear your reasoning on election day. You and Pimlico Plumbers fighting for the workers of Britain.
Its a massive and wide reaching piece of legislation. You're not looking for a one word summary are you?
He's a twat of the first degree. As a prospective Liberal voter it's not good news, point taken. Ah well, the Greens are always an option.
Dam Hippy!He's a twat of the first degree. As a prospective Liberal voter it's not good news, point taken. Ah well, the Greens are always an option.
Well yeah and your view on it is ?
I don't need a one word answer but also nothing to long and boring(Also include some puns).
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Unsure of the stringency of the poll - but if it's at all reliable then fairly interesting insofar as a lot of Labour leavers don't really seem to care about Brexit all that much compared to other political groupings, with issues like healthcare taking prevalence for them instead. Compare that with Labour Remainers - where it's seen as the most important issue in both columns. Would lend some credibility to the argument that Labour wouldn't have necessarily alienated a lot of their Leave voters by taking a more anti-Brexit stance over the past couple of years.
I can only really speak from my corner of the world. I imagine you're mainly interested in the Any Qualified Provider section. As a CEO of a not for profit that receives commissions from several Government bodies I was worried that we'd be forced out of the market by larger private sector entities offering loss leading contracts. A bit of this did happen, such as several sexual health contracts being won by Virgin (there's ya pun). This happened in the legal advice sector too when LASPO landed. But in terms of service delivery, I still don't see as many front line commissions being won by private sector entities as was expected at the time. Whether this is accident or design is harder to say and we may see it accelerating over time.
On health, there's a bucket load of stuff apart from AQP, which in truth is a minor part of the Act. Mostly its a mixed bag. Healthwatch, Health and Wellbeing Boards and Public Health England were all probably a success on balance. As for CCGs, its too early to tell. It may turn out to be another pointless reorganisation, but in some regions we're seeing combined social and health care commissioning bodies emerge, which could be really good for our clients. Monitor was a failure.
But there's more to it than just that. There stuff like fluoride in water, the licensing of providers, stuff about how Local Authorities connect to health services and a tonne of other stuff that I barely know a thing about. So even working under the Act I have only a small understanding of it.
And then of course there's the fact that you can't just roll back to the former legislation. Presumably you're happy to simply accept on faith that anything Labour does will be better than what goes before, but I want to see what they're suggesting myself. Labour has been very quiet on the role of the charity sector in delivering commissioned services, but since we're not publicly owned Im guessing he sees us as the lesser of two evils but not the preferred solution. Since there are numerous examples of the charity sector being better than statutory bodies, I'd be totally against that being rolled back.
And as for whatever restructure of the NHS Labour has in mind, well, there's a lot of ways to mess up a reorg on that scale. I'll judge it on its merits when I see the proposal.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
they must be pretty confident of an extension date from the EU by then?
I suspect (provided they have accepted any extension by then) it will pass?
I imagine so and the final death knells of any hope of remain may then be sounded.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
I don't get it... If he doesn't give them more time and they don't go for an election what does he win? His "deal" will still be dead, right? What is he thinking is his leverage here?
Election time.
Same day as our work Christmas party!
Same day as our work Christmas party!
I actually think its a fairly logical move
It allows him to try and get his brexit deal through in time for an election (so he can fight the election on having won brexit)... if they dont approve the deal it plays into the remoaner parliament blocking the will of the people tripe that he keeps troweling on
And by suggesting a date that's so close, he limits the maximum amount of time that the bill can be scrutinised by parliament even while making the offer and appearing like he's compromising. His dream scenario would be the bill managing to pass before the election without being enacted yet, this allows it.
yeah because although 12th december sounds like a long time i assume there is a 5 week period or something like that for campaigning so effectivley it will still be i guess a week and a half max?
Yes, Parliament will be dissolved on 6 November for the election.
Suggestion is that it would be November 6th that Parliament gets dissolved so yeah, they're basically saying we'll give you two weeks and then have an election. Guessing the date would also create issues for uni students voting which will benefit the Tories as well.
possibly not... arent most uni students actually still registered at home and many dont change it to where they are at uni (im assuming as they are such dossers they will have broken up for xmas by then) half joking
I remember when I was at uni a couple of years ago that people were encouraged to register there rather than at home and the ones I knew mostly did so (though since I studied politics, might not have been representative). And the date would have been last week before we broke up, some would have gone home early obviously.
Yeah but what does it help him to make parliament look bad when he needs parliament to get the election he wants for the sake of changing parliament? If he gets his election parliament won't look bad, and if he doesn't it doesn't matter because there won't be an election soon...
Labours anger should be with itself given how it pretty much jump started the Lib Dem recovery by being so disingenuous about brexit.
Parliament either don't give him the election (he blames parliament) or they do... And if they do either they pass his deal unamanded in which case he says he defeated parliament ... Or they try and amend it (most probable)... He pulls the deal and blames parliament for being remoaners trying to attach a referendum or a customs union and stop the 1st referendum
And even if they pass the deal with a referendum it's irelavent as there is a ge on 12 December and parliament can't bind it's it's successor
Tbf the vast majority of MP's and members seem to be remain and pretty vocal about it... I think the anger needs to be pretty targeted at the long term anti EU leadership of the party