-
So, what about the plan to bring in ACA's, without a vote in parliament on it, which allows private companies like Virgincare, blue cross and spire be full all round care providers with no accountability to anyone except shareholders.
For all kinds of reasons those should be avoided and fought against.
jaitch-
I don't know what ACA's are. Google will only give me Obama's Affordable Care Act results.
My point still stands. Whether or not it's a good long term policy, getting private companies to provide aspects of public services is cheap stopgap to deliver services. It is not the same as dismantling a free at the point of delivery universal health system and trying to kill people.
I'd be interested in seeing the sources you're referencing for the claim that private health providers will only be accountable to shareholders - and properly understanding what you actually mean by that.
hugo7
I think people need a bit of perspective with the whole Tory vs. NHS. I can't remember the last time I heard an actual Conservative MP express the sort of opposition to the NHS people make out. Even the couple of hardline neocon Tories I know actually want a systemic change in the NHS to something more like the Swiss model, rather than a US model.
Yes, spending as a % of GDP is down, but fundamentally we spend more of our money on health than anything else, and people are using it more. Making out that there is a fundamental Conservative policy to destroy the NHS and kill people for cash is hyperbole. It reminds me of those same Tories framing middle class Labour supporters as being lazy underachievers who perpetually game the system and want everyone else to pay for their lifestyles.
Like most things in politics incompetence probably plays a greater role than any great master plan.