£3m needed to pay for new radiotherapy unit

This Is Wiltshire: What the reception area could look like What the reception area could look like

CAMPAIGNERS, charities and the general public will need to rally behind the Great Western Hospital to secure £3m over the next four years if plans for a new Swindon radiotherapy unit are to become a reality.

Last week, the board of the Oxford University Hospitals NHS Trust backed plans for a new service to be based at GWH to cope with increasing demand in the region and allow Swindon cancer patients to receive treatment much closer to home.

Members are expected to formally approve detailed plans later this month.

The OUHT will invest a maximum of £14.7m in the development of a satellite service.

But the department will remain a far-away dream unless a minimum of £2.6m is raised by GWH with the help of health groups and generous benefactors.

Several fundraising options have been put forward by OUHT such as having a third-party group lead the appeal on behalf of GWH, such as the hospital’s own charity Brighter Futures.

Although consequential, the sum to be secured was deemed realistic and achievable overall by Valentine Morby Associates in a report that was submitted to Oxford health chiefs.

The firm suggested that if it optimised all its resources, GWH’s charity alone would be able to raise £2m per year.

“It is estimated that it would take GWH four years to raise the full £3m,” the report said.

“A more realistic target for GWH would be £2.6m net income raised within three years.

“The Association of NHS Charities’ latest figures show that a reasonably well-run NHS hospital charity can expect to raise around 0.7 per cent of the overall parent hospital budget.

“This would mean that, with a trust budget of £284m in 2012/2013, GWH’s charity could be raising around £2m annually.”

But the appeal may run the risk of entering in direct competition with other organisations relying on donations to survive, such as Prospect Hospice and Wiltshire Air Ambulance.

It cost more than £5.8m to run the hospice last year, while the air ambulance charity has to raise £2.5m to continue flying each year.

Cancer patients in and around Swindon currently have to travel up to 90 minutes each way to Oxford to use one of five machines available. This is significantly more than the 45 minutes recommended by the National Radiotherapy Advisory Group.

The intensive treatment can involve up to 37 trips to Oxford’s Churchill Hospital.

Beryl Bowles, founder of Affect By Cancer, a self-help support group for patients, their carers, relatives and friends, said she, along with campaigners, had been fighting behind the scenes for such a service to open in the town for years.

“It’s excellent news and long awaited,” she said.

“We have been fighting for this for many years. In the last 12 months it seems to have sped up.

“The treatment only lasts 10 minutes but it takes patients all day when they have to get picked up with other patients and then wait to get home. It will be so much better for them.

“It’s definitely positive. And it looks as if it’s going to happen a lot quicker than we thought.”

On average each year, patients from Swindon and Wiltshire make 13,000 trips to Churchill Hospital’s radiotherapy department – meaning combined they spend nearly 20,000 hours, or more than two years, on the road.

Comments (18)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

9:36am Mon 27 Jan 14

AndySN3 says...

I am sure thee trust can make savings over 4 years to cover this essential service??
We are spending an absolute fortune on agency staff, and the people who profit from this are the agencies!
Surely this is a matter of priority, and the people who need this service deserve all the help they can get, not to mention a little dignity!!
I am sure thee trust can make savings over 4 years to cover this essential service?? We are spending an absolute fortune on agency staff, and the people who profit from this are the agencies! Surely this is a matter of priority, and the people who need this service deserve all the help they can get, not to mention a little dignity!! AndySN3
  • Score: 10

9:55am Mon 27 Jan 14

Always Grumpy says...

How about the council using some of the £18 million section 106 money it seems unable to spend. At least this would benefit the whole community.
How about the council using some of the £18 million section 106 money it seems unable to spend. At least this would benefit the whole community. Always Grumpy
  • Score: 6

10:14am Mon 27 Jan 14

A.Baron-Cohen says...

How about charging patients with one off fee when they use the service?
How about charging patients with one off fee when they use the service? A.Baron-Cohen
  • Score: -13

10:37am Mon 27 Jan 14

AndySN3 says...

A.Baron-Cohen wrote:
How about charging patients with one off fee when they use the service?
Surely this is why we pay our taxes and N.I payments??

If we are going to go down that road, it is a back door to privatisation?

The simple answer is to cut costs elsewhere, and make the service more efficient by focusing on essential services.
[quote][p][bold]A.Baron-Cohen[/bold] wrote: How about charging patients with one off fee when they use the service?[/p][/quote]Surely this is why we pay our taxes and N.I payments?? If we are going to go down that road, it is a back door to privatisation? The simple answer is to cut costs elsewhere, and make the service more efficient by focusing on essential services. AndySN3
  • Score: 10

10:50am Mon 27 Jan 14

StillPav says...

Call me old fashioned, but aren't taxes supposed to pay for this kind of thing?
Call me old fashioned, but aren't taxes supposed to pay for this kind of thing? StillPav
  • Score: 4

11:44am Mon 27 Jan 14

A.Baron-Cohen says...

AndySN3 wrote:
A.Baron-Cohen wrote:
How about charging patients with one off fee when they use the service?
Surely this is why we pay our taxes and N.I payments??

If we are going to go down that road, it is a back door to privatisation?

The simple answer is to cut costs elsewhere, and make the service more efficient by focusing on essential services.
There is nothing wrong with privatisation of the NHS (it is already happening) it would simply mean that everyone would pay less taxes and those using the service would pay for it, and possibly claim the cost back from their health insurance.
[quote][p][bold]AndySN3[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]A.Baron-Cohen[/bold] wrote: How about charging patients with one off fee when they use the service?[/p][/quote]Surely this is why we pay our taxes and N.I payments?? If we are going to go down that road, it is a back door to privatisation? The simple answer is to cut costs elsewhere, and make the service more efficient by focusing on essential services.[/p][/quote]There is nothing wrong with privatisation of the NHS (it is already happening) it would simply mean that everyone would pay less taxes and those using the service would pay for it, and possibly claim the cost back from their health insurance. A.Baron-Cohen
  • Score: -10

12:01pm Mon 27 Jan 14

AndySN3 says...

A.Baron-Cohen wrote:
AndySN3 wrote:
A.Baron-Cohen wrote:
How about charging patients with one off fee when they use the service?
Surely this is why we pay our taxes and N.I payments??

If we are going to go down that road, it is a back door to privatisation?

The simple answer is to cut costs elsewhere, and make the service more efficient by focusing on essential services.
There is nothing wrong with privatisation of the NHS (it is already happening) it would simply mean that everyone would pay less taxes and those using the service would pay for it, and possibly claim the cost back from their health insurance.
The NHS is there to help and care for people at source, and is a system that works, but it is stretched to breaking, and there are people bleeding the service dry, and this isn't patients, it is suppliers!!

If the service ever were privatised, I doubt we would ever see a reduction in taxes, it would be swallowed up by something else.

I cannot ever see a case for charging people for various treatments, unless they are for personal choice rather than life threatening or quality of life.
[quote][p][bold]A.Baron-Cohen[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]AndySN3[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]A.Baron-Cohen[/bold] wrote: How about charging patients with one off fee when they use the service?[/p][/quote]Surely this is why we pay our taxes and N.I payments?? If we are going to go down that road, it is a back door to privatisation? The simple answer is to cut costs elsewhere, and make the service more efficient by focusing on essential services.[/p][/quote]There is nothing wrong with privatisation of the NHS (it is already happening) it would simply mean that everyone would pay less taxes and those using the service would pay for it, and possibly claim the cost back from their health insurance.[/p][/quote]The NHS is there to help and care for people at source, and is a system that works, but it is stretched to breaking, and there are people bleeding the service dry, and this isn't patients, it is suppliers!! If the service ever were privatised, I doubt we would ever see a reduction in taxes, it would be swallowed up by something else. I cannot ever see a case for charging people for various treatments, unless they are for personal choice rather than life threatening or quality of life. AndySN3
  • Score: 8

12:35pm Mon 27 Jan 14

A.Baron-Cohen says...

AndySN3 wrote:
A.Baron-Cohen wrote:
AndySN3 wrote:
A.Baron-Cohen wrote:
How about charging patients with one off fee when they use the service?
Surely this is why we pay our taxes and N.I payments??

If we are going to go down that road, it is a back door to privatisation?

The simple answer is to cut costs elsewhere, and make the service more efficient by focusing on essential services.
There is nothing wrong with privatisation of the NHS (it is already happening) it would simply mean that everyone would pay less taxes and those using the service would pay for it, and possibly claim the cost back from their health insurance.
The NHS is there to help and care for people at source, and is a system that works, but it is stretched to breaking, and there are people bleeding the service dry, and this isn't patients, it is suppliers!!

If the service ever were privatised, I doubt we would ever see a reduction in taxes, it would be swallowed up by something else.

I cannot ever see a case for charging people for various treatments, unless they are for personal choice rather than life threatening or quality of life.
Yes the NHS is there to help and care but it is no longer coping with the disastrous decisions made by so many. There is now a good option to split the health service and make those accountable for the choices they have made.
[quote][p][bold]AndySN3[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]A.Baron-Cohen[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]AndySN3[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]A.Baron-Cohen[/bold] wrote: How about charging patients with one off fee when they use the service?[/p][/quote]Surely this is why we pay our taxes and N.I payments?? If we are going to go down that road, it is a back door to privatisation? The simple answer is to cut costs elsewhere, and make the service more efficient by focusing on essential services.[/p][/quote]There is nothing wrong with privatisation of the NHS (it is already happening) it would simply mean that everyone would pay less taxes and those using the service would pay for it, and possibly claim the cost back from their health insurance.[/p][/quote]The NHS is there to help and care for people at source, and is a system that works, but it is stretched to breaking, and there are people bleeding the service dry, and this isn't patients, it is suppliers!! If the service ever were privatised, I doubt we would ever see a reduction in taxes, it would be swallowed up by something else. I cannot ever see a case for charging people for various treatments, unless they are for personal choice rather than life threatening or quality of life.[/p][/quote]Yes the NHS is there to help and care but it is no longer coping with the disastrous decisions made by so many. There is now a good option to split the health service and make those accountable for the choices they have made. A.Baron-Cohen
  • Score: -5

12:41pm Mon 27 Jan 14

AndySN3 says...

A.Baron-Cohen wrote:
AndySN3 wrote:
A.Baron-Cohen wrote:
AndySN3 wrote:
A.Baron-Cohen wrote:
How about charging patients with one off fee when they use the service?
Surely this is why we pay our taxes and N.I payments??

If we are going to go down that road, it is a back door to privatisation?

The simple answer is to cut costs elsewhere, and make the service more efficient by focusing on essential services.
There is nothing wrong with privatisation of the NHS (it is already happening) it would simply mean that everyone would pay less taxes and those using the service would pay for it, and possibly claim the cost back from their health insurance.
The NHS is there to help and care for people at source, and is a system that works, but it is stretched to breaking, and there are people bleeding the service dry, and this isn't patients, it is suppliers!!

If the service ever were privatised, I doubt we would ever see a reduction in taxes, it would be swallowed up by something else.

I cannot ever see a case for charging people for various treatments, unless they are for personal choice rather than life threatening or quality of life.
Yes the NHS is there to help and care but it is no longer coping with the disastrous decisions made by so many. There is now a good option to split the health service and make those accountable for the choices they have made.
When you say make those accountable, are you talking about the patient or the management??

I disagree with disbanding the NHS, it is a catch all system, regardless of class or other discriminatory factors.

People who want private health care have a choice to do so, and this should always be the case.

What is wrong that consultants and doctors are allowed to have feet in both camps, and this means people reliant on the NHS are pushed down the queue.

Proper separation of private and NHS would help, and workers are on one side or the other!
[quote][p][bold]A.Baron-Cohen[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]AndySN3[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]A.Baron-Cohen[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]AndySN3[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]A.Baron-Cohen[/bold] wrote: How about charging patients with one off fee when they use the service?[/p][/quote]Surely this is why we pay our taxes and N.I payments?? If we are going to go down that road, it is a back door to privatisation? The simple answer is to cut costs elsewhere, and make the service more efficient by focusing on essential services.[/p][/quote]There is nothing wrong with privatisation of the NHS (it is already happening) it would simply mean that everyone would pay less taxes and those using the service would pay for it, and possibly claim the cost back from their health insurance.[/p][/quote]The NHS is there to help and care for people at source, and is a system that works, but it is stretched to breaking, and there are people bleeding the service dry, and this isn't patients, it is suppliers!! If the service ever were privatised, I doubt we would ever see a reduction in taxes, it would be swallowed up by something else. I cannot ever see a case for charging people for various treatments, unless they are for personal choice rather than life threatening or quality of life.[/p][/quote]Yes the NHS is there to help and care but it is no longer coping with the disastrous decisions made by so many. There is now a good option to split the health service and make those accountable for the choices they have made.[/p][/quote]When you say make those accountable, are you talking about the patient or the management?? I disagree with disbanding the NHS, it is a catch all system, regardless of class or other discriminatory factors. People who want private health care have a choice to do so, and this should always be the case. What is wrong that consultants and doctors are allowed to have feet in both camps, and this means people reliant on the NHS are pushed down the queue. Proper separation of private and NHS would help, and workers are on one side or the other! AndySN3
  • Score: 4

12:56pm Mon 27 Jan 14

Davey Gravey says...

Although this facility is needed already, with the town growing continually it makes it even more necessary. Money should be found for this without the need of fund raising.
Although this facility is needed already, with the town growing continually it makes it even more necessary. Money should be found for this without the need of fund raising. Davey Gravey
  • Score: 6

1:38pm Mon 27 Jan 14

house on the hill says...

AndySN3 wrote:
A.Baron-Cohen wrote:
AndySN3 wrote:
A.Baron-Cohen wrote:
AndySN3 wrote:
A.Baron-Cohen wrote:
How about charging patients with one off fee when they use the service?
Surely this is why we pay our taxes and N.I payments??

If we are going to go down that road, it is a back door to privatisation?

The simple answer is to cut costs elsewhere, and make the service more efficient by focusing on essential services.
There is nothing wrong with privatisation of the NHS (it is already happening) it would simply mean that everyone would pay less taxes and those using the service would pay for it, and possibly claim the cost back from their health insurance.
The NHS is there to help and care for people at source, and is a system that works, but it is stretched to breaking, and there are people bleeding the service dry, and this isn't patients, it is suppliers!!

If the service ever were privatised, I doubt we would ever see a reduction in taxes, it would be swallowed up by something else.

I cannot ever see a case for charging people for various treatments, unless they are for personal choice rather than life threatening or quality of life.
Yes the NHS is there to help and care but it is no longer coping with the disastrous decisions made by so many. There is now a good option to split the health service and make those accountable for the choices they have made.
When you say make those accountable, are you talking about the patient or the management??

I disagree with disbanding the NHS, it is a catch all system, regardless of class or other discriminatory factors.

People who want private health care have a choice to do so, and this should always be the case.

What is wrong that consultants and doctors are allowed to have feet in both camps, and this means people reliant on the NHS are pushed down the queue.

Proper separation of private and NHS would help, and workers are on one side or the other!
That is actually quite dangerous as the best doctors and consultants know they can make more money in the private sector so forcing them to choose would actually reduce the quality of care, not improve it. At least now they share their time.

Also you have to remember those on private healthcare are still being forced to pay for the NHS through their taxes so they are paying twice. Imagine the queues if there was no private and everyone relied on the NHS! Sometime you have to look at the bigger picture and realise it could be a whole lot worse!!!
[quote][p][bold]AndySN3[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]A.Baron-Cohen[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]AndySN3[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]A.Baron-Cohen[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]AndySN3[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]A.Baron-Cohen[/bold] wrote: How about charging patients with one off fee when they use the service?[/p][/quote]Surely this is why we pay our taxes and N.I payments?? If we are going to go down that road, it is a back door to privatisation? The simple answer is to cut costs elsewhere, and make the service more efficient by focusing on essential services.[/p][/quote]There is nothing wrong with privatisation of the NHS (it is already happening) it would simply mean that everyone would pay less taxes and those using the service would pay for it, and possibly claim the cost back from their health insurance.[/p][/quote]The NHS is there to help and care for people at source, and is a system that works, but it is stretched to breaking, and there are people bleeding the service dry, and this isn't patients, it is suppliers!! If the service ever were privatised, I doubt we would ever see a reduction in taxes, it would be swallowed up by something else. I cannot ever see a case for charging people for various treatments, unless they are for personal choice rather than life threatening or quality of life.[/p][/quote]Yes the NHS is there to help and care but it is no longer coping with the disastrous decisions made by so many. There is now a good option to split the health service and make those accountable for the choices they have made.[/p][/quote]When you say make those accountable, are you talking about the patient or the management?? I disagree with disbanding the NHS, it is a catch all system, regardless of class or other discriminatory factors. People who want private health care have a choice to do so, and this should always be the case. What is wrong that consultants and doctors are allowed to have feet in both camps, and this means people reliant on the NHS are pushed down the queue. Proper separation of private and NHS would help, and workers are on one side or the other![/p][/quote]That is actually quite dangerous as the best doctors and consultants know they can make more money in the private sector so forcing them to choose would actually reduce the quality of care, not improve it. At least now they share their time. Also you have to remember those on private healthcare are still being forced to pay for the NHS through their taxes so they are paying twice. Imagine the queues if there was no private and everyone relied on the NHS! Sometime you have to look at the bigger picture and realise it could be a whole lot worse!!! house on the hill
  • Score: -2

1:52pm Mon 27 Jan 14

swindondad says...

The ever growing population of the GWH catchment area means that this service is and will continue to be needed for years to come.

Why this money can't be found from the N.I. payments and taxes that I and millions of others make is hard to fathom.

As for the ridicules idea of "charging" the NHS has always been and should remain "free at the point of delivery".

If as I fear, we (the people of the area) will have to end up fund raising for the balance of the money’s needed then the sooner we get started the better.
The ever growing population of the GWH catchment area means that this service is and will continue to be needed for years to come. Why this money can't be found from the N.I. payments and taxes that I and millions of others make is hard to fathom. As for the ridicules idea of "charging" the NHS has always been and should remain "free at the point of delivery". If as I fear, we (the people of the area) will have to end up fund raising for the balance of the money’s needed then the sooner we get started the better. swindondad
  • Score: 3

2:16pm Mon 27 Jan 14

A.Baron-Cohen says...

AndySN3 wrote:
A.Baron-Cohen wrote:
AndySN3 wrote:
A.Baron-Cohen wrote:
AndySN3 wrote:
A.Baron-Cohen wrote:
How about charging patients with one off fee when they use the service?
Surely this is why we pay our taxes and N.I payments??

If we are going to go down that road, it is a back door to privatisation?

The simple answer is to cut costs elsewhere, and make the service more efficient by focusing on essential services.
There is nothing wrong with privatisation of the NHS (it is already happening) it would simply mean that everyone would pay less taxes and those using the service would pay for it, and possibly claim the cost back from their health insurance.
The NHS is there to help and care for people at source, and is a system that works, but it is stretched to breaking, and there are people bleeding the service dry, and this isn't patients, it is suppliers!!

If the service ever were privatised, I doubt we would ever see a reduction in taxes, it would be swallowed up by something else.

I cannot ever see a case for charging people for various treatments, unless they are for personal choice rather than life threatening or quality of life.
Yes the NHS is there to help and care but it is no longer coping with the disastrous decisions made by so many. There is now a good option to split the health service and make those accountable for the choices they have made.
When you say make those accountable, are you talking about the patient or the management??

I disagree with disbanding the NHS, it is a catch all system, regardless of class or other discriminatory factors.

People who want private health care have a choice to do so, and this should always be the case.

What is wrong that consultants and doctors are allowed to have feet in both camps, and this means people reliant on the NHS are pushed down the queue.

Proper separation of private and NHS would help, and workers are on one side or the other!
The NHS should be split into two services:
A&E funded by the taxpayers
NHS healthcare funded by private contributions and run by Insurance companies
The other alternative would be to refund taxes for those willing to pay for private healthcare themselves and or getting this benefit provided by their employer.
[quote][p][bold]AndySN3[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]A.Baron-Cohen[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]AndySN3[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]A.Baron-Cohen[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]AndySN3[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]A.Baron-Cohen[/bold] wrote: How about charging patients with one off fee when they use the service?[/p][/quote]Surely this is why we pay our taxes and N.I payments?? If we are going to go down that road, it is a back door to privatisation? The simple answer is to cut costs elsewhere, and make the service more efficient by focusing on essential services.[/p][/quote]There is nothing wrong with privatisation of the NHS (it is already happening) it would simply mean that everyone would pay less taxes and those using the service would pay for it, and possibly claim the cost back from their health insurance.[/p][/quote]The NHS is there to help and care for people at source, and is a system that works, but it is stretched to breaking, and there are people bleeding the service dry, and this isn't patients, it is suppliers!! If the service ever were privatised, I doubt we would ever see a reduction in taxes, it would be swallowed up by something else. I cannot ever see a case for charging people for various treatments, unless they are for personal choice rather than life threatening or quality of life.[/p][/quote]Yes the NHS is there to help and care but it is no longer coping with the disastrous decisions made by so many. There is now a good option to split the health service and make those accountable for the choices they have made.[/p][/quote]When you say make those accountable, are you talking about the patient or the management?? I disagree with disbanding the NHS, it is a catch all system, regardless of class or other discriminatory factors. People who want private health care have a choice to do so, and this should always be the case. What is wrong that consultants and doctors are allowed to have feet in both camps, and this means people reliant on the NHS are pushed down the queue. Proper separation of private and NHS would help, and workers are on one side or the other![/p][/quote]The NHS should be split into two services: A&E funded by the taxpayers NHS healthcare funded by private contributions and run by Insurance companies The other alternative would be to refund taxes for those willing to pay for private healthcare themselves and or getting this benefit provided by their employer. A.Baron-Cohen
  • Score: -2

3:05pm Mon 27 Jan 14

swindondad says...

ABC the administration cost alone one such a service split would more than eat up any potential savings. In fact it sounds like some re-hash of Obarmacare and that is all ready proving to be a fiasco.
ABC the administration cost alone one such a service split would more than eat up any potential savings. In fact it sounds like some re-hash of Obarmacare and that is all ready proving to be a fiasco. swindondad
  • Score: 0

3:42pm Mon 27 Jan 14

AndySN3 says...

house on the hill wrote:
AndySN3 wrote:
A.Baron-Cohen wrote:
AndySN3 wrote:
A.Baron-Cohen wrote:
AndySN3 wrote:
A.Baron-Cohen wrote:
How about charging patients with one off fee when they use the service?
Surely this is why we pay our taxes and N.I payments??

If we are going to go down that road, it is a back door to privatisation?

The simple answer is to cut costs elsewhere, and make the service more efficient by focusing on essential services.
There is nothing wrong with privatisation of the NHS (it is already happening) it would simply mean that everyone would pay less taxes and those using the service would pay for it, and possibly claim the cost back from their health insurance.
The NHS is there to help and care for people at source, and is a system that works, but it is stretched to breaking, and there are people bleeding the service dry, and this isn't patients, it is suppliers!!

If the service ever were privatised, I doubt we would ever see a reduction in taxes, it would be swallowed up by something else.

I cannot ever see a case for charging people for various treatments, unless they are for personal choice rather than life threatening or quality of life.
Yes the NHS is there to help and care but it is no longer coping with the disastrous decisions made by so many. There is now a good option to split the health service and make those accountable for the choices they have made.
When you say make those accountable, are you talking about the patient or the management??

I disagree with disbanding the NHS, it is a catch all system, regardless of class or other discriminatory factors.

People who want private health care have a choice to do so, and this should always be the case.

What is wrong that consultants and doctors are allowed to have feet in both camps, and this means people reliant on the NHS are pushed down the queue.

Proper separation of private and NHS would help, and workers are on one side or the other!
That is actually quite dangerous as the best doctors and consultants know they can make more money in the private sector so forcing them to choose would actually reduce the quality of care, not improve it. At least now they share their time.

Also you have to remember those on private healthcare are still being forced to pay for the NHS through their taxes so they are paying twice. Imagine the queues if there was no private and everyone relied on the NHS! Sometime you have to look at the bigger picture and realise it could be a whole lot worse!!!
I disagree.

Surely if a doctor or consultant is employed by the NHS, then their time is given to the NHS.

People have the choice of whether to go private, it isn't something that is forced on people.

You will always get variations in pay from one sector to another, but I think it is grossly unfair that people working for the NHS are then lining their pockets further by working for the private sector, surely they need to work full time for one sector or the other?

All the current system means is the NHS authorities are having to plug gaps and use expensive agency staff whilst their employees flit from sector to sector. The poor end of patient user is the one who suffers, as usual!!!
[quote][p][bold]house on the hill[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]AndySN3[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]A.Baron-Cohen[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]AndySN3[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]A.Baron-Cohen[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]AndySN3[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]A.Baron-Cohen[/bold] wrote: How about charging patients with one off fee when they use the service?[/p][/quote]Surely this is why we pay our taxes and N.I payments?? If we are going to go down that road, it is a back door to privatisation? The simple answer is to cut costs elsewhere, and make the service more efficient by focusing on essential services.[/p][/quote]There is nothing wrong with privatisation of the NHS (it is already happening) it would simply mean that everyone would pay less taxes and those using the service would pay for it, and possibly claim the cost back from their health insurance.[/p][/quote]The NHS is there to help and care for people at source, and is a system that works, but it is stretched to breaking, and there are people bleeding the service dry, and this isn't patients, it is suppliers!! If the service ever were privatised, I doubt we would ever see a reduction in taxes, it would be swallowed up by something else. I cannot ever see a case for charging people for various treatments, unless they are for personal choice rather than life threatening or quality of life.[/p][/quote]Yes the NHS is there to help and care but it is no longer coping with the disastrous decisions made by so many. There is now a good option to split the health service and make those accountable for the choices they have made.[/p][/quote]When you say make those accountable, are you talking about the patient or the management?? I disagree with disbanding the NHS, it is a catch all system, regardless of class or other discriminatory factors. People who want private health care have a choice to do so, and this should always be the case. What is wrong that consultants and doctors are allowed to have feet in both camps, and this means people reliant on the NHS are pushed down the queue. Proper separation of private and NHS would help, and workers are on one side or the other![/p][/quote]That is actually quite dangerous as the best doctors and consultants know they can make more money in the private sector so forcing them to choose would actually reduce the quality of care, not improve it. At least now they share their time. Also you have to remember those on private healthcare are still being forced to pay for the NHS through their taxes so they are paying twice. Imagine the queues if there was no private and everyone relied on the NHS! Sometime you have to look at the bigger picture and realise it could be a whole lot worse!!![/p][/quote]I disagree. Surely if a doctor or consultant is employed by the NHS, then their time is given to the NHS. People have the choice of whether to go private, it isn't something that is forced on people. You will always get variations in pay from one sector to another, but I think it is grossly unfair that people working for the NHS are then lining their pockets further by working for the private sector, surely they need to work full time for one sector or the other? All the current system means is the NHS authorities are having to plug gaps and use expensive agency staff whilst their employees flit from sector to sector. The poor end of patient user is the one who suffers, as usual!!! AndySN3
  • Score: 0

4:09pm Mon 27 Jan 14

A.Baron-Cohen says...

swindondad wrote:
ABC the administration cost alone one such a service split would more than eat up any potential savings. In fact it sounds like some re-hash of Obarmacare and that is all ready proving to be a fiasco.
Au contraire, it would save billions and would firmly put the cost of financing the NHS into the hands of those using it.
Obamacare is not essential nor needed in the USA, I am more with the Republicans on this, the users must pay for their healthcare.
People can take a loan to go to University, well the same could be done for those not able to pay for expensive treatments if they do not have the necessary cover.
[quote][p][bold]swindondad[/bold] wrote: ABC the administration cost alone one such a service split would more than eat up any potential savings. In fact it sounds like some re-hash of Obarmacare and that is all ready proving to be a fiasco.[/p][/quote]Au contraire, it would save billions and would firmly put the cost of financing the NHS into the hands of those using it. Obamacare is not essential nor needed in the USA, I am more with the Republicans on this, the users must pay for their healthcare. People can take a loan to go to University, well the same could be done for those not able to pay for expensive treatments if they do not have the necessary cover. A.Baron-Cohen
  • Score: -1

5:02pm Mon 27 Jan 14

House with no name says...

Can I perhaps draw the discussion back on topic - I am sure we all have known someone who has had to travel all the way to Oxford & back for this life saving treatment.

I am sure there are worthy arguments against charity money being used for this purpose but surely those points can be argued after we secure a service whereby those in our local community are diagnosed with life threatening Cancer can have the opportunity for prompt treatment near their homes without the unnecessary need to compound their illness with long & uncomfortable journeys.

Perhaps the same could be said for the Prospect and Air Ambulance project that already take more than 3/4 of the charity cake in this area - but without charity donations they would not be able to exist in their present format.
Can I perhaps draw the discussion back on topic - I am sure we all have known someone who has had to travel all the way to Oxford & back for this life saving treatment. I am sure there are worthy arguments against charity money being used for this purpose but surely those points can be argued after we secure a service whereby those in our local community are diagnosed with life threatening Cancer can have the opportunity for prompt treatment near their homes without the unnecessary need to compound their illness with long & uncomfortable journeys. Perhaps the same could be said for the Prospect and Air Ambulance project that already take more than 3/4 of the charity cake in this area - but without charity donations they would not be able to exist in their present format. House with no name
  • Score: 2

6:41am Tue 28 Jan 14

house on the hill says...

AndySN3 wrote:
house on the hill wrote:
AndySN3 wrote:
A.Baron-Cohen wrote:
AndySN3 wrote:
A.Baron-Cohen wrote:
AndySN3 wrote:
A.Baron-Cohen wrote:
How about charging patients with one off fee when they use the service?
Surely this is why we pay our taxes and N.I payments??

If we are going to go down that road, it is a back door to privatisation?

The simple answer is to cut costs elsewhere, and make the service more efficient by focusing on essential services.
There is nothing wrong with privatisation of the NHS (it is already happening) it would simply mean that everyone would pay less taxes and those using the service would pay for it, and possibly claim the cost back from their health insurance.
The NHS is there to help and care for people at source, and is a system that works, but it is stretched to breaking, and there are people bleeding the service dry, and this isn't patients, it is suppliers!!

If the service ever were privatised, I doubt we would ever see a reduction in taxes, it would be swallowed up by something else.

I cannot ever see a case for charging people for various treatments, unless they are for personal choice rather than life threatening or quality of life.
Yes the NHS is there to help and care but it is no longer coping with the disastrous decisions made by so many. There is now a good option to split the health service and make those accountable for the choices they have made.
When you say make those accountable, are you talking about the patient or the management??

I disagree with disbanding the NHS, it is a catch all system, regardless of class or other discriminatory factors.

People who want private health care have a choice to do so, and this should always be the case.

What is wrong that consultants and doctors are allowed to have feet in both camps, and this means people reliant on the NHS are pushed down the queue.

Proper separation of private and NHS would help, and workers are on one side or the other!
That is actually quite dangerous as the best doctors and consultants know they can make more money in the private sector so forcing them to choose would actually reduce the quality of care, not improve it. At least now they share their time.

Also you have to remember those on private healthcare are still being forced to pay for the NHS through their taxes so they are paying twice. Imagine the queues if there was no private and everyone relied on the NHS! Sometime you have to look at the bigger picture and realise it could be a whole lot worse!!!
I disagree.

Surely if a doctor or consultant is employed by the NHS, then their time is given to the NHS.

People have the choice of whether to go private, it isn't something that is forced on people.

You will always get variations in pay from one sector to another, but I think it is grossly unfair that people working for the NHS are then lining their pockets further by working for the private sector, surely they need to work full time for one sector or the other?

All the current system means is the NHS authorities are having to plug gaps and use expensive agency staff whilst their employees flit from sector to sector. The poor end of patient user is the one who suffers, as usual!!!
So what you are saying is that no one should be allowed to have a second job or 2 part time ones rather than a full time one? I am sorry but who are you to tell doctors how to live their lives? If someone offered you an extra job on really good money are you seriously saying you would turn it down? The usual double standards in action of so many today.

As for being forced to go private, this article is about not having the equipment they need to treat you properly and add to that the dirty hospital we read about and the massive waiting lists for operations, clearly we are being forced to go private. Again are you really saying that if you had the money to have your operation done next week you would actually prefer to wait around for 9 months on the NHS instead? Seriously?

This is a public sector department, which like all the others, is run massively inefficiently with all the performance managers, box tickers and old style working practices and dead wood staff, so what do you expect?
[quote][p][bold]AndySN3[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]house on the hill[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]AndySN3[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]A.Baron-Cohen[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]AndySN3[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]A.Baron-Cohen[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]AndySN3[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]A.Baron-Cohen[/bold] wrote: How about charging patients with one off fee when they use the service?[/p][/quote]Surely this is why we pay our taxes and N.I payments?? If we are going to go down that road, it is a back door to privatisation? The simple answer is to cut costs elsewhere, and make the service more efficient by focusing on essential services.[/p][/quote]There is nothing wrong with privatisation of the NHS (it is already happening) it would simply mean that everyone would pay less taxes and those using the service would pay for it, and possibly claim the cost back from their health insurance.[/p][/quote]The NHS is there to help and care for people at source, and is a system that works, but it is stretched to breaking, and there are people bleeding the service dry, and this isn't patients, it is suppliers!! If the service ever were privatised, I doubt we would ever see a reduction in taxes, it would be swallowed up by something else. I cannot ever see a case for charging people for various treatments, unless they are for personal choice rather than life threatening or quality of life.[/p][/quote]Yes the NHS is there to help and care but it is no longer coping with the disastrous decisions made by so many. There is now a good option to split the health service and make those accountable for the choices they have made.[/p][/quote]When you say make those accountable, are you talking about the patient or the management?? I disagree with disbanding the NHS, it is a catch all system, regardless of class or other discriminatory factors. People who want private health care have a choice to do so, and this should always be the case. What is wrong that consultants and doctors are allowed to have feet in both camps, and this means people reliant on the NHS are pushed down the queue. Proper separation of private and NHS would help, and workers are on one side or the other![/p][/quote]That is actually quite dangerous as the best doctors and consultants know they can make more money in the private sector so forcing them to choose would actually reduce the quality of care, not improve it. At least now they share their time. Also you have to remember those on private healthcare are still being forced to pay for the NHS through their taxes so they are paying twice. Imagine the queues if there was no private and everyone relied on the NHS! Sometime you have to look at the bigger picture and realise it could be a whole lot worse!!![/p][/quote]I disagree. Surely if a doctor or consultant is employed by the NHS, then their time is given to the NHS. People have the choice of whether to go private, it isn't something that is forced on people. You will always get variations in pay from one sector to another, but I think it is grossly unfair that people working for the NHS are then lining their pockets further by working for the private sector, surely they need to work full time for one sector or the other? All the current system means is the NHS authorities are having to plug gaps and use expensive agency staff whilst their employees flit from sector to sector. The poor end of patient user is the one who suffers, as usual!!![/p][/quote]So what you are saying is that no one should be allowed to have a second job or 2 part time ones rather than a full time one? I am sorry but who are you to tell doctors how to live their lives? If someone offered you an extra job on really good money are you seriously saying you would turn it down? The usual double standards in action of so many today. As for being forced to go private, this article is about not having the equipment they need to treat you properly and add to that the dirty hospital we read about and the massive waiting lists for operations, clearly we are being forced to go private. Again are you really saying that if you had the money to have your operation done next week you would actually prefer to wait around for 9 months on the NHS instead? Seriously? This is a public sector department, which like all the others, is run massively inefficiently with all the performance managers, box tickers and old style working practices and dead wood staff, so what do you expect? house on the hill
  • Score: 1

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree