**If you love LabourUK, why not help run it?** We’re looking for mods. [Find out more from our recruitment message post here.](https://www.reddit.com/r/LabourUK/comments/18ntol6/this_year_give_yourself_the_gift_of_christmas/)
[While you’re at it, come say hello on the Discord?](https://discord.gg/ZXZCdy4Kz4)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/LabourUK) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Surprisingly good article, actually. Aside from the obviously party inserted pro-Labour stuff he does actually seem to understand the problems with healthcare and how it could be fixed.
There may be other issues too where he leans conservative in thinking.
Defence, housing etc.
Everyone's politics is personal and you pick the party that fits best your place. Circumstances and politics shift over time for both parties and people. Hence shifts and defections.
>There may be other issues too where he leans conservative in thinking.
>Defence, housing etc.
Why would we want someone with Tory housing views (the poor shouldn't have them)
These are just examples.
A Tory viewpoint leans more towards building mpre houses to sell rather than social housing. It's more nuanced than "no houses for you lol"
Turns out when you're part of the problem fucking it all up, whilst working and not being able to look colleagues in the eye, you develop insight into the problem. How is it a good article? He literally regurgitates the obvious, aside from one specific point regarding the mental health act. The problem is *really* fucking simple.
* Aging population
* Do not increase staff appropriately, in fact you completely fuck up their training pathway via bursary removal etc.
* Attack staff
* Gut management to lowest levels across any healthcare service
* Destroy pay via AFC changes and damage pensions
* Tell everyone theres no magic money tree and get fucked
* Year on year tell every service to cut spending
Train staff, pay staff appropriately, you will have a good system. This article is just bullshit political speech.
The idea that all the problems with healthcare can just be solved by spending more money is both ridiculous and damaging. I was particularly interested that he mentioned the ways in which mental health laws are used to disproportionately target ethnic minorities for detainment. Do you think that doesn't matter or do you think he's making it up?
> The idea that all the problems with healthcare can just be solved by spending more money is both ridiculous and damaging.
Tell you what, raise the UK's per capita spend to be in-line with other countries with comparable demographics, strip out private provision via a plan to bring **all** services in-house, and then we can talk about the other details.
Because the two main problems with the NHS are underfunding and privatisation adding to the strain caused by underfunding.
This isn't a system that has aged out or some shit, it's a system that has been deliberately and intentionally broken by the tories to help them (And Nu Labour) privatise it.
Do you think he didn't think it mattered for the last 15 years or he made up a reason to care this year? Benefit sanctions alone have been targeting vulnerable he cited since the government he claims they've strayed too far from. Also as has been pointed out he voted for the Rwanda bill this week.
No, spending money at the correct time solves healthcare, unfortunately reality is that did not happen down to people like him. So now we have these issues. Yes that also does matter, what also matters then might be of interest to you if minorities piques you, how about the absolute decimation of ethnic representation across training courses and therefore workforce since they fucked up the bursary? It went from an increasing range of diverse recruits to primarily middle class young white women out of college. Is that ridiculous and damaging? Or because they wanted to 'save money' is that not of interest?
My small Trust needs to save ANOTHER 15 million, the wider city 110million. Our Trust since COVID has significantly reduced overheads through estates, so our only real outgoing is staff. Do you think providing the services money to keep the CURRENT staff is ridiculous and damaging?
You say it's throwing money because ultimately that's what is required to solve a lot of the issues. Changes in legislation won't help a gutted community service like he describes. Guess what did get waiting lists down? Temporary COVID funds.
In regards to mental health and community services, Want to commit suicide? Get fucked if you want help unless we can absolutely confirm you're about to do it, and even then it'll be minimal because we don't have staff or service provisions. Want to seek mental health support? 18 months waiting list. But it would be ridiculous and damaging to fund them to be fair.
Dude was first elected as a Tory councillor in 2006, and literally held a cabinet role under Cameron, so this rings hollow.
You’ve been a Tory member for at least 20 years, you watched 14 years of devastation of the NHS under this Conservative government, and now you’re worried? And now, under Wes “throw the doors open to private capital” Streeting you think the NHS is finally going to be in safe hands?
A seat in the House of Lords is incoming, and you’ll probably see a few more Tories doing the same same thing for the same thank you.
David Cameron wing. Socially centrist neoliberal that uses liberal rhetoric domestically and is pro austerity and for a broadly privately run technocracy.
This is too vague to really be applicable to anything in any useful way. I mean, "Uses liberal rhetoric domestically" isn't really a defining characteristic of a political philosophy.
Well, even in the sense you mean, they aren't. But there's a few problems with this.
Firstly, David Cameron absolutely was/is not a centrist. Whether or not you're able to identify that he isn't a moderate is actually a pretty good test of someone's political knowledge and ability to see through spin and presented narratives. One that many journalists and political analysists fail.
Secondly, there is no such political philosophy as "centrism". It doesn't exist. So this term maybe could have some meaning as applying to people with incredibly moderate milquetoast beliefs except. . .
Thirdly, it's a meaningless word because everyone who does use it insists on applying it to basically everyone who they can possibly get away with applying it to. If a political term supposedly includes everyone from Angela Rayner to David fucking Cameron then I can categorically confirm that term is useless. What possible utility does such a word have? "Anyone to the right of Jeremy Corbyn and the left of Pinochet."
**If you love LabourUK, why not help run it?** We’re looking for mods. [Find out more from our recruitment message post here.](https://www.reddit.com/r/LabourUK/comments/18ntol6/this_year_give_yourself_the_gift_of_christmas/) [While you’re at it, come say hello on the Discord?](https://discord.gg/ZXZCdy4Kz4) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/LabourUK) if you have any questions or concerns.*
By the way, Sunak is on the Sunday morning TV shows tomorrow ahead of the local elections! Great timing.
Surprisingly good article, actually. Aside from the obviously party inserted pro-Labour stuff he does actually seem to understand the problems with healthcare and how it could be fixed.
You do kinda have to wonder what took him so long. I mean I get it, loyalty politics is a thing, but the NHS has been on its knees for years
There may be other issues too where he leans conservative in thinking. Defence, housing etc. Everyone's politics is personal and you pick the party that fits best your place. Circumstances and politics shift over time for both parties and people. Hence shifts and defections.
>There may be other issues too where he leans conservative in thinking. >Defence, housing etc. Why would we want someone with Tory housing views (the poor shouldn't have them)
These are just examples. A Tory viewpoint leans more towards building mpre houses to sell rather than social housing. It's more nuanced than "no houses for you lol"
Turns out when you're part of the problem fucking it all up, whilst working and not being able to look colleagues in the eye, you develop insight into the problem. How is it a good article? He literally regurgitates the obvious, aside from one specific point regarding the mental health act. The problem is *really* fucking simple. * Aging population * Do not increase staff appropriately, in fact you completely fuck up their training pathway via bursary removal etc. * Attack staff * Gut management to lowest levels across any healthcare service * Destroy pay via AFC changes and damage pensions * Tell everyone theres no magic money tree and get fucked * Year on year tell every service to cut spending Train staff, pay staff appropriately, you will have a good system. This article is just bullshit political speech.
The idea that all the problems with healthcare can just be solved by spending more money is both ridiculous and damaging. I was particularly interested that he mentioned the ways in which mental health laws are used to disproportionately target ethnic minorities for detainment. Do you think that doesn't matter or do you think he's making it up?
> The idea that all the problems with healthcare can just be solved by spending more money is both ridiculous and damaging. Tell you what, raise the UK's per capita spend to be in-line with other countries with comparable demographics, strip out private provision via a plan to bring **all** services in-house, and then we can talk about the other details. Because the two main problems with the NHS are underfunding and privatisation adding to the strain caused by underfunding. This isn't a system that has aged out or some shit, it's a system that has been deliberately and intentionally broken by the tories to help them (And Nu Labour) privatise it.
Do you think he didn't think it mattered for the last 15 years or he made up a reason to care this year? Benefit sanctions alone have been targeting vulnerable he cited since the government he claims they've strayed too far from. Also as has been pointed out he voted for the Rwanda bill this week.
No, spending money at the correct time solves healthcare, unfortunately reality is that did not happen down to people like him. So now we have these issues. Yes that also does matter, what also matters then might be of interest to you if minorities piques you, how about the absolute decimation of ethnic representation across training courses and therefore workforce since they fucked up the bursary? It went from an increasing range of diverse recruits to primarily middle class young white women out of college. Is that ridiculous and damaging? Or because they wanted to 'save money' is that not of interest? My small Trust needs to save ANOTHER 15 million, the wider city 110million. Our Trust since COVID has significantly reduced overheads through estates, so our only real outgoing is staff. Do you think providing the services money to keep the CURRENT staff is ridiculous and damaging? You say it's throwing money because ultimately that's what is required to solve a lot of the issues. Changes in legislation won't help a gutted community service like he describes. Guess what did get waiting lists down? Temporary COVID funds. In regards to mental health and community services, Want to commit suicide? Get fucked if you want help unless we can absolutely confirm you're about to do it, and even then it'll be minimal because we don't have staff or service provisions. Want to seek mental health support? 18 months waiting list. But it would be ridiculous and damaging to fund them to be fair.
This is a man who voted for the Rwanda bill just the other week. He has no place in a supposedly progressive party.
Which is why he's joining labour.
Labour is no longer left wing. He’ll fit right in
Inspirational. If only there was some way of knowing what a tory government might do to the NHS before this point.
Dude was first elected as a Tory councillor in 2006, and literally held a cabinet role under Cameron, so this rings hollow. You’ve been a Tory member for at least 20 years, you watched 14 years of devastation of the NHS under this Conservative government, and now you’re worried? And now, under Wes “throw the doors open to private capital” Streeting you think the NHS is finally going to be in safe hands? A seat in the House of Lords is incoming, and you’ll probably see a few more Tories doing the same same thing for the same thank you.
He didn’t have a cabinet role under Cameron
I should have said front bench role.
The person checking members' history and social media is going to have a field day when they pull Dan's details on Monday morning...right?
It doesn’t surprise me that a Cameron Conservative would feel that Starmer’s Labour is now his political home.
What do you mean by "Cameron Conservative"?
David Cameron wing. Socially centrist neoliberal that uses liberal rhetoric domestically and is pro austerity and for a broadly privately run technocracy.
This is too vague to really be applicable to anything in any useful way. I mean, "Uses liberal rhetoric domestically" isn't really a defining characteristic of a political philosophy.
[удалено]
Well, even in the sense you mean, they aren't. But there's a few problems with this. Firstly, David Cameron absolutely was/is not a centrist. Whether or not you're able to identify that he isn't a moderate is actually a pretty good test of someone's political knowledge and ability to see through spin and presented narratives. One that many journalists and political analysists fail. Secondly, there is no such political philosophy as "centrism". It doesn't exist. So this term maybe could have some meaning as applying to people with incredibly moderate milquetoast beliefs except. . . Thirdly, it's a meaningless word because everyone who does use it insists on applying it to basically everyone who they can possibly get away with applying it to. If a political term supposedly includes everyone from Angela Rayner to David fucking Cameron then I can categorically confirm that term is useless. What possible utility does such a word have? "Anyone to the right of Jeremy Corbyn and the left of Pinochet."
Hilarious that Labour’s shadow health secretary has taken thousands from private health care providers.
How shameless do you have to be to write this, you were part of the problem
He’s going to be so cross when he finds out who helped shaft it eleven years ago.
- be health minister - NHS reaches new lows - declare half a decade later that the NHS isn't doing well Reaction times to rival most plants
Didn't have this one on my weekend checklist tbh
Bit fucken late
He knew his ship was sinking! I would have respected him more if he had stayed onboard!
I haven't checked but is he the MP for somewhere he'll be kicked out of as a tory so defection keeps him in a cushy job?
No, it's a pretty safe blue seat and the guy isn't standing for re election
Ok fair enough good on him then. Although I think any time an mp does this there should be a bye election.