Paradise Papers: Tax Havens Exposed

[DarloRich]

I often wonder why the Cromwellian era only lasted for such a short period of time in Britain, when this was the last physical attempt to totally change the political face of the country by removing the monarchy (and its head in more ways than one) and introducing new ideas as how the country should be run. Have you ever looked deeply into the military campaigns of Cromwell and the views inherent in them during that time period?

Perhaps the "Corbynesque" views when fully entailed in power could borrow from the monarchistical ideas of Henry VIII which were put into operation at the time of the Dissolution of the Monasteries and take over ownership of large edifices such as the remaining cathedrals to sell off to those with the available finance, such as those tribal monarchies of the Middle East, with the funds put towards such Socialist truisms.

Goodness me. You really go over the top on this kind of thing. No one will be removing the monarchy and certainly not in the style of Charles I. I am also fairly certain that Corbyn isnt going to "dissolve" Catholic assets in the UK or set up his own religion. I cant comment on his views on divorce but doubt he has the power to execute his wives.

BTW I wrote my A level history paper on the Whig/Tory political differences of the period and the impact on the campaigns of Oliver Cromwell.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Clearly. However, the problem is that wave continues to roll and hasn't gone away. Corbyn becomes more popular by the day. I don't like the man or many of his views but he isnt going away.

One saving grace is that he is growing older every day. Why did the Corbyn statement made not so long ago that the Labour Party was "ready for office" appear to have fallen on deaf political ears? The great thing about being in Opposition is that you can put all your political views forward and yet not be accountable for actually putting them into political operation.

Why does this sudden "Corbynesque" euphoria remind me of the storyline of "Les Miserables"?

 

[Bromley boy]

What I don't understand is how you can think that better public services is a bad thing. How can more doctors, nurses and policeman be a bad thing? You make out like people having jobs and being paid a proper wage is a bad thing.

To deliver those services the government needs tax revenues. Why should a bit more of that money come from the richest instead of us in the middle or at the bottom?

But you're assuming here that more taxing and spending = better public services.

It isn't as simple as that. The other half of the equation, usually ignored by the left, is that we need to ensure public money is being spent wisely. The answer to the problems in the NHS is always "it needs more money" but it's when you speak to NHS employees that you hear about the profligate waste and inefficiency that takes place within that organisation.

There's a real danger of simply creating an bottomless pit into which ever more money is thrown with no improvement in the services it delivers.

 

[DarloRich]

But you're assuming here that more taxing and spending = better public services.

It isn't as simple as that. The other half of the equation, usually ignored by the left, is that we need to ensure public money is being spent wisely. The answer to the problems in the NHS is always "it needs more money" but it's when you speak to NHS employees that you hear about the profligate waste and inefficiency that takes place within that organisation.

There's a real danger of simply creating an bottomless pit into which ever more money is thrown with no improvement in the services it delivers.

Indeed. The NHS needs more money, it needs to spend that money better and deliver more with that money. What it doesn't need is the impact of the Conservative health reforms or Labours management strata.

However I would rather have the NHS than an insurance system. That means we need taxation revenue and I would rather more of that came form those with the most. It is those principles and beliefs again.............

 

[Bromley boy]

One saving grace is that he is growing older every day.

This is as true for Corbyn as it is for the rest of us.

On a more serious note, he's certainly getting to an age where the gruelling demands of leading a political party might start to seem unappealing.

The worry I have is who might be waiting in the wings to replace him.

 

[WelshBluebird]

I think efficiently delivered and targeted public services are a good thing for the taxpayer and service users. Over-generously funded, poorly delivered public services are only good for public sector workers and those nasty capitalists who charge what they can get away with. Having worked in the public sector I know how much money can be wasted and how much better services can be delivered without any increase in costs.

And yet councils are having to cut front line services an raise council tax because they have been told by Westminster they need to make so called "efficiency savings".

 

[Bromley boy]

However I would rather have the NHS than an insurance system. That means we need taxation revenue and I would rather more of that came form those with the most. It is those principles and beliefs again.............

I wouldn't want a purely insurance system either.

I'd like a more efficient version of the NHS. I do worry that the NHS is seen as "untouchable" where changes to improve efficiency are seen as "bad", but spending more money into it is automatically "good".

What about providing tax incentives to encourage people to take out private health insurance? This might help reduce the burden on the NHS, particularly for minor operations.

 

[WelshBluebird]

where changes to improve efficiency are seen as "bad"

Probably because, as I alluded to when talking about councils above, "efficiency savings" are often code for front line service or staffing cuts.

 

[DarloRich]

I wouldn't want a purely insurance system either.

I'd like a more efficient version of the NHS. I do worry that the NHS is seen as "untouchable" where changes to improve efficiency are seen as "bad", but spending more money into it is automatically "good".

What about providing tax incentives to encourage people to take out private health insurance? This might help reduce the burden on the NHS, particularly for minor operations.

The problem is the changes often are bad and are done more for political benefit than benefit to the NHS. I will go as far as saying i am sure the likes of Hunt think he is helping improve things but he manifestly isnt.

Guess what - I am no fan of private health care. I know it serves a purpose but it takes resources of all types from the NHS and makes the waiting lists for those of us without it longer. What about taxing private health care to the hilt and giving that money to the NHS?

 

[Dai Corner]

Let me give give a personal example of how the NHS seems to be run for the benefit of its employees rather than patients or taxpayers and /or poorly managed.

I was on long-term sick leave, awaiting the results of tests before I was allowed to return to work.

Under the NHS, it was a case of seeing a consultant, him deciding I needed such and such a test, waiting a month for a test appointment, waiting another month to see a different consultant (by which time the test results were out of date), another few weeks wait for another test, and other month to see a third consultant .....

Each appointment involved an administrator sending me out a letter, a receptionist booking me in on the day and a volunteer making me a cup of tea while I waited as well as the consultant or the technician carrying out the tests.

In the end I got fed up and booked an appointment at a private clinic. I was offered one at a convenient time the following week.

On my arrival the same receptionist who had booked the appointment greeted me and introduced me to the consultant. We talked about my condition and decided on the relevant tests. I had these done there and then while the consultant saw another patient.

I drank a cup of tea made by said receptionist while I waited for the test results to be put together and saw the consultant again. He explained the results and was able to confirm I was well enough to return to work. All sorted in one afternoon.

The private clinic gave a better service using fewer resources just by being better organised.

 

[WelshBluebird]

Two things to remember when comparing the NHS to private clinics:

1. Private clinics will generally see less patients. Which mean the same member of staff can fulfill multiple roles. In your case for example, the receptionist could book the appointment and then book you in on the day. In a busy NHS GP clinic or hospital, the workload may well be higher so you need to separate out the jobs.
2. Private clinics will generally use the NHS for emergency care, so they do not have to deal with some of the more expensive and time consuming elements that the NHS has to deal with.

And in terms of what you mentioned about tests, be wary of wanting more private and insurance based involvement there. Especially if we were to move to a more american style system of people buying insurance to be covered, then you are essentially incentivising GP's and doctors to run tests that may not actually be necessary just so they can then claim money back from the insurers.

 

[Dai Corner]

Two things to remember when comparing the NHS to private clinics:

1. Private clinics will generally see less patients. Which mean the same member of staff can fulfill multiple roles. In your case for example, the receptionist could book the appointment and then book you in on the day. In a busy NHS GP clinic or hospital, the workload may well be higher so you need to separate out the jobs.
2. Private clinics will generally use the NHS for emergency care, so they do not have to deal with some of the more expensive and time consuming elements that the NHS has to deal with.

I take your point, but mine was that the private clinic used less resources to do the same work by being better organised and doing everything in one visit.

As an aside, me being off sick for months cost the taxpayer thousands as they had to employ someone to cover for me (as well as pay my salary).

 

[northwichcat]

Some dental surgeries have NHS and private dentists in the same building and you speak to the same receptionist whether you are seeing a NHS one or a private one.

 

[DarloRich]

I take your point, but mine was that the private clinic used less resources to do the same work by being better organised and doing everything in one visit.

But that is vastly simplifying the situation.

 

[Bromley boy]

Guess what - I am no fan of private health care. I know it serves a purpose but it takes resources of all types from the NHS and makes the waiting lists for those of us without it longer. What about taxing private health care to the hilt and giving that money to the NHS?

But again that's just levelling down and chucking more money into the NHS without necessarily improving it.

If you admit private health serves a purpose, and can be used to take pressure off the NHS for minor ops, surely that is a good thing for the NHS and you can see private health as a necessary evil despite being ideologically opposed to it .

 

[Dai Corner]

But that is vastly simplifying the situation.

Simplifying things is just what the NHS needs to do in some cases.

 

[DarloRich]

But again that's just levelling down and chucking more money into the NHS without necessarily improving it.

If you admit private health serves a purpose, and can be used to take pressure off the NHS for minor ops, surely that is a good thing for the NHS and you can see private health as a necessary evil despite being ideologically opposed to it .

I see it as leveling up

I am sure, for those able to access private health care, it is of great benefit. For those of us without it simply pushes our operation further down the line. Which view is more important?

Simplifying things is just what the NHS needs to do in some cases.

Obviously - Ask that wonderful receptionist in the private clinic to carry the same work load for the same wage using the same equipment as in the hospital then compare.

 

[Bromley boy]

I see it as leveling up

I am sure, for those able to access private health care, it is of great benefit. For those of us without it simply pushes our operation further down the line. Which view is more important?

I don't see how you arrive at the view that someone who removes themselves from the NHS system for a minor operation is pushing the operations of those still in the system further down the line?

Surely it's having the opposite effect?!

 

[Dai Corner]

I should have added that the consultant I saw privately previously worked at the NHS hospital and wanted his department run on similar lines to his private clinic but was refused so he left and set up on his own.

 

[Dai Corner]

I see it as leveling up

I am sure, for those able to access private health care, it is of great benefit. For those of us without it simply pushes our operation further down the line. Which view is more important?



Obviously - Ask that wonderful receptionist in the private clinic to carry the same work load for the same wage using the same equipment as in the hospital then compare.

The two receptionists at the hospital didn't appear terribly busy and I'm sure they could have found time to talk to me on my way out and book my next appointment instead of having an administrator based in a different town send a letter and possibly take a phone call to rearrange it.

If patients only had to attend once rather than three or for times their workload would be reduced too. I have no idea what they earned but I wouldn't be surprised if it was more than their counterpart at the clinic.

 

[Arglwydd Golau]

Let me give give a personal example of how the NHS seems to be run for the benefit of its employees rather than patients or taxpayers and /or poorly managed.

I was on long-term sick leave, awaiting the results of tests before I was allowed to return to work.

Under the NHS, it was a case of seeing a consultant, him deciding I needed such and such a test, waiting a month for a test appointment, waiting another month to see a different consultant (by which time the test results were out of date), another few weeks wait for another test, and other month to see a third consultant .....

Each appointment involved an administrator sending me out a letter, a receptionist booking me in on the day and a volunteer making me a cup of tea while I waited as well as the consultant or the technician carrying out the tests.

In the end I got fed up and booked an appointment at a private clinic. I was offered one at a convenient time the following week.

On my arrival the same receptionist who had booked the appointment greeted me and introduced me to the consultant. We talked about my condition and decided on the relevant tests. I had these done there and then while the consultant saw another patient.

I drank a cup of tea made by said receptionist while I waited for the test results to be put together and saw the consultant again. He explained the results and was able to confirm I was well enough to return to work. All sorted in one afternoon.

The private clinic gave a better service using fewer resources just by being better organised.

Of course, you are conveniently forgetting that the Private Healthcare sector does not contribute to the enormous cost of training all the Healthcare professionals (and others) who now are employed within that sector.

 

[Dai Corner]

Of course, you are conveniently forgetting that the Private Healthcare sector does not contribute to the enormous cost of training all the Healthcare professionals (and others) who now are employed within that sector.

That wasn't my point. My point was that the clinic gave a better service using fewer resources and why can't the NHS be that well organised (or at least better organised than it seems to be).

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

I think Robert Peston gave a good summary when he said Corbyn likes to think the public have moved to the left but we have to remember Theresa May's election campaigning was dire.

Yet despite all that what you say about "dire election campaigning" which should have been "manna from heaven" to a Labour Party that had developed a fast growing support, the electorate still returned a greater number of Conservative MPs in comparison to the figure of elected Labour Party MPs. Does that not speak volumes about electability as perceived.

 

[Arglwydd Golau]

That wasn't my point. My point was that the clinic gave a better service using fewer resources and why can't the NHS be that well organised (or at least better organised than it seems to be).

....and my point is that the Private Healthcare sector can 'afford' to provide this service for you within a speedier timeframe as it doesn't have to spend any resources on Training!

 

[DarloRich]

I don't see how you arrive at the view that someone who removes themselves from the NHS system for a minor operation is pushing the operations of those still in the system further down the line?

Surely it's having the opposite effect?!

Perhaps I should have said indirectly - the consultant you see in your private clinic also (often) does NHS work. The more private work he does the less time he can offer to the NHS. His staff, trained no doubt, by the NHS are deprived to that service by way of being offered better wages and nicer hours. Such is life, but it is damaging to the NHS and by extension us mere plebs waiting patiently in the queue for help.

That wasn't my point. My point was that the clinic gave a better service using fewer resources and why can't the NHS be that well organised (or at least better organised than it seems to be).

I accept your perception but think we have to look deeper than the superficial. It could be that the NHS receptionists are lazy and feckless. It could be that they are drowning in work and need 4 staff more to deliver the same service as offered at the private clinic to 20 patients to their 200 patients.

 

[WelshBluebird]

I take your point, but mine was that the private clinic used less resources to do the same work by being better organised and doing everything in one visit.

I think my point still stands though. It is a lot easier to do things with less resources when you have less people to do deal with.
And DarloRich's point about training is a good one too.

As for doing everything in one visit - I guess that is a question of how we want healthcare to be timed for people.
Do we want people to have to wait ages to even start the process, but then get it over quickly once it has started. Or do we want people to be able to begin the process fairly early on but the process itself take longer?

 

[northwichcat]

Yet despite all that what you say about "dire election campaigning" which should have been "manna from heaven" to a Labour Party that had developed a fast growing support, the electorate still returned a greater number of Conservative MPs in comparison to the figure of elected Labour Party MPs. Does that not speak volumes about electability as perceived.

The Conservatives could have retained a majority government until 2020 had a General Election not been called. Theresa May called a General Election because she felt there was the opportunity to turn a slim majority in to a sizable majority. However, her plan backfired as the Conservatives lost their majority and now have to rely on support from the DUP to get policies implemented.

 

[Dai Corner]

Perhaps I should have said indirectly - the consultant you see in your private clinic also (often) does NHS work. The more private work he does the less time he can offer to the NHS. His staff, trained no doubt, by the NHS are deprived to that service by way of being offered better wages and nicer hours. Such is life, but it is damaging to the NHS and by extension us mere plebs waiting patiently in the queue for help.



I accept your perception but think we have to look deeper than the superficial. It could be that the NHS receptionists are lazy and feckless. It could be that they are drowning in work and need 4 staff more to deliver the same service as offered at the private clinic to 20 patients to their 200 patients.

My main point was that they have three or four times as much work as they would have if patients only had to attend once instead of three or four due to simplification and better organisation of the whole process

 

[DarloRich]

My main point was that they have three or four times as much work as they would have if patients only had to attend once instead of three or four due to simplification and better organisation of the whole process

I note the point but reiterate the resources available and the numbers to be treated are vastly different. That isnt to say things couldn't be made better btw just that i feel you are comparing a 2017 Ferrari with a 1970's double decker and wondering why the bus is slow away from the lights.

 

[Arglwydd Golau]

Perhaps I should have said indirectly - the consultant you see in your private clinic also (often) does NHS work. The more private work he does the less time he can offer to the NHS. His staff, trained no doubt, by the NHS are deprived to that service by way of being offered better wages and nicer hours. Such is life, but it is damaging to the NHS and by extension us mere plebs waiting patiently in the queue for help..

From my experience, some (not all) Consultants will carry out Private work during the time that they are supposed to be undertaking NHS work. I once went with one of my Nursing Staff to a private establishment to support her during a tricky meeting and found one of our Consultants working there. (during the time he was contracted with the NHS) He was quite embarrassed, unsurprisingly as he was a nice guy, but of course it was just accepted that that is what they do.