I’ve not tended to discuss last Saturday’s temper tantrum because, frankly, it was little more than loudmouthed shouting from the economically illiterate and their useful idiots. A vocal minority. The silent majority remained at home, did the shopping, played football, went for a walk and so on. There’s not much you can say when presented with a combination of blind stupidity, refusal to face hard facts and ideological bigotry.
However the Guardian, like the BBC seems to be determined to suggest that these wankers speak for the rest of us who did not descend upon London to smash up banks that took not a penny of public money and occupy charitable organisations. I suspect that I was not alone in being unimpressed by the leader of her majesty’s loyal opposition sharing a platform with these people – thereby confirming his lack of fitness for the role. Jackie Ashley thinks that it’s not his fault that his speech was juxtaposed with the images of thugs smashing up property.
Nor can Miliband be blamed for the embarrassing juxtaposition of his words at the Hyde Park rally and the actions of a group of anarchists in Oxford Street as they attacked the police.
Actually, yes, he can be blamed. This is hardly an unexpected phenomenon. These scumbags descend on London every time such an event occurs and it behoves the leader of the opposition to make sure that he is not involved either directly or by association. It’s simple enough – stay away. You don’t need a huge intellect to figure it out.
However, it is not that which caught my eye in the CiF article, it was this:
The cause of the patient worried about the effect of part-privatisation on the standard of their care is the same as that of the NHS ancillary worker worried about losing their post.
One of the oft-repeated mantras from leftists is that the NHS should not be privatised, that profit will, somehow, sully the standard of care we receive and that practitioners will be cast upon the streets. Having had first-hand experience of a different approach, I am – when being charitable – bemused by this twaddle. The French system is partially state subsidised and partially funded by insurance. Holders of a carte vitale are entitled to free prescriptions and pay a fee for medical treatment. They can claim around 70% of that fee back from the state and the rest from their insurer. Emergency treatment is covered by the social contributions paid by employers and the self-employed. In many respects, this is similar to the NI contributions in the UK. However, provision comes from a mix of public providers and private businesses. It is a system that works well. Private providers do not offer a lower level of care because they are making a profit – indeed, from what I have seen, the quality is first class and, of course, they provide employment for partitioners. And, bear in mind that for serious illnesses, not only is it fully covered, but a patient is hospitalised incredibly quickly. A colleague who was diagnosed with a brain tumour was in and operated upon in a matter of days. The French don’t appear to do waiting lists. Nor did I have to worry about appointments to see a GP. I just turned up and took my turn.
Okay, there are downsides. The bureaucracy is mind-numbing. In the two years I was resident in France I did not receive my carte vitale and speaking to others, this is not unusual. If I’d been there for a few more years, it would finally have surfaced. That said, I did receive the benefits that went with it by showing my E106 and correspondence from the CPAM with my social security number.
So, when people say that the NHS is under attack or that private business should not be in the business of providing publicly funded healthcare, I can only conclude that they are being dogmatic. There is no logical reason why a high quality service cannot be provided through a system similar to that in France. And, no one is suggesting in France that lifestyle choices should be a reason to restrict one’s healthcare. I was never asked about such things.
One final thought; if the NHS is the envy of the world as we are often told, then surely the rest of the world would be lining up to emulate it. They are, aren’t they? They aren’t? Oh!
Ditto with self in Germany for 4 1/2 years. NHS Nein Danke.
In my limited experience I’d take private care every time. The NHS sometimes works; often it doesn’t and is woefully incompetent. If you complain about anything to do with the NHS it’s a mortal sin and its veil is unmasked to reveal red underneath.
It’s not about the NHS – it’s about socialist dogma.
I agree with what your saying, but I do have a distrust of so-called privatisations, as they don’t seem to lead to free competition very often.
The French managed it.
The French and German models seem to work well based on mine and my brother’s experiences, but the US model is terrifying. It combines ruthless profit seeking and risk averse policies that mean doing nothing is (seemingly) the prefered option, unless there is serious money to be garnered. Being asked by the ambulance crew, called to attend a friend who had broken her leg catastrophically, if she had insurance before they would approach her was sobering. Turns out, if she hadn’t, they couldn’t help, and a different ambulance company would have had to attend. Nothing will persuade me that that is civilised or humane. And the itemised bill was something to behold. Every swab, stitch, drug quantity, interaction with a member of the medical staff, all going ker-ching down the pages.
Likewise PT. I have too many relatives who know what the situation was like in the UK before the NHS. Certainly the NHS is poorly (over) managed, but I would not wish to see a return to either what went before or the US system.
Supporters of the US style system should watch Michael Moores “Sicko”.
I am not for one moment suggesting the US model. If there is a group I detest more than the state, it is insurance companies. We have enough of their risk averse behaviour with compulsory motor insurance, without letting them loose with our healthcare.
The broken leg example in France would have been handled in much the same way as the UK. Off to hospital in an ambulance and no invoice as this is covered by the social charges everyone pays. However, the ambulance will be provided by a private company – so, too, might the hospital.
I know you weren’t advocating the US model, Longrider, but far too many of the it’s-my-money-not-the-state’s brigade would willingly entrust an entire nation’s health care to the private insurance industry. I’ve seen and experienced the NHS at its best (which is fair to middling compared to France) and its worst (making anywhere else seem preferable). It seems to cost a lot of money to get an average service in this country.
Yes, I just wanted to make my position clear. I believe a universally funded approach is the right one to avoid people being denied care because they are too expensive, yet at the same time, there is room in the system for the best of provision from whichever organisation wishes to provide it. There may well be a better system than the French one, but it would have to be pretty damned good.