Rishi Sunak and the Conservative Party.

[brad465]

The USA is always used to supress debate on restructuring UK healthcare. I don't think many, bar a few would want such a system in the UK. If anything was forthcoming then I think the current strikes would look like a tea party. However as you've pointed out, there are other viable alternatives to the NHS as demonstrated by European countries and a few others.

When you see stories like this one regarding Sunak visiting US healthcare firms about investing in the UK, it's easy to see why such an argument exists. Besides, if this was the course of action being pursued, it would not be the first time a Government of any colour has done something that few actually wanted. Personally I wouldn't mind a European style insurance system, as it seems to work without huge financial burdens on citizens, but that doesn't seem to be the direction of travel.

 

[Gloster]

The USA is always used to supress debate on restructuring UK healthcare. I don't think many, bar a few would want such a system in the UK. If anything was forthcoming then I think the current strikes would look like a tea party. However as you've pointed out, there are other viable alternatives to the NHS as demonstrated by European countries and a few others.

But if the few are the politicians who make the decisions and the people who pull their strings, such things come to pass even if everybody else is against it. A week is a longtime in politics and they will hope that by the next election they will have a few high-profile wins (“Prime Minister opens the new Trumpmed Mayfair clinic for the repair of split ends”) and they can fool the public into believing that it’s s a good thing. Unfortunately, it seems to work.

 

[najaB]

The USA is always used to supress debate on restructuring UK healthcare.

Because their system is so bad that any move to be more like it needs to be called out at every possible opportunity.

The USA spends more on healthcare per capita than any other developed economy but has the lowest life expectancy of the G20. In fact, life expectancy is lower now than it was a decade ago.

 

[Lost property]

But if the few are the politicians who make the decisions and the people who pull their strings, such things come to pass even if everybody else is against it. A week is a longtime in politics and they will hope that by the next election they will have a few high-profile wins (“Prime Minister opens the new Trumpmed Mayfair clinic for the repair of split ends”) and they can fool the public into believing that it’s s a good thing. Unfortunately, it seems to work.

Oh tsk ! surely you recall Boris promising, always a fatal mistake for those who do, "40 new hospitals ! " .

However, the first cold weather is about to arrive...and now we can expect the "we've been doing everything possible to help " litany of "excuses" to emerge once the first, sadly, casualties of the aptly termed " heat or eat " option make the headlines...don't expect too many photo- ops of members of this Gov't at food banks or warm spaces.

 

[Gloster]

It gets worse, at least morally, if that was possible. The Grauniad is reporting ‘Afghans died because of Raab’s delay in reviewing documents, officials told.’ The delay was because he refused to review documents in formats he did not like. There really is little one can say.

(Sorry, I can’t do a link.)

 

[Bletchleyite]

It gets worse, at least morally, if that was possible. The Grauniad is reporting ‘Afghans died because of Raab’s delay in reviewing documents, officials told.’ The delay was because he refused to review documents in formats he did not like. There really is little one can say.

I'd want to know the background to that. I've certainly said to people before "break that into paragraphs and then I'll read it". Is he dyslexic? If so that might be a necessity.

I'm no Tory but Raab doesn't strike me as one who would do that to be awkward.

 

[WizCastro197]

It gets worse, at least morally, if that was possible. The Grauniad is reporting ‘Afghans died because of Raab’s delay in reviewing documents, officials told.’ The delay was because he refused to review documents in formats he did not like. There really is little one can say.

(Sorry, I can’t do a link.)

https://www.theguardian.com/politic...b-delay-in-reviewing-documents-officials-told

A meeting of Ministry of Justice officials at which Dominic Raab’s conduct was discussed was told “people had died” in the Afghanistan evacuation because of his refusal to review documents in formats which he did not like, the Guardian has been told.

Grauniad

But seriously, imagine being that petty that you would happily let people die because you were too 'me me me'?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 5 Dec 2022 ==

I'd want to know the background to that. I've certainly said to people before "break that into paragraphs and then I'll read it". Is he dyslexic? If so that might be a necessity.

I'm no Tory but Raab doesn't strike me as one who would do that to be awkward.

I don't believe he is dyslexic, his Wikipedia nor any other sources seem to suggest he his

 

[david1212]

Bring in mandatory euthanasia upon diagnosis of a terminal illness and/or reaching a set age around current life expectancy, whichever comes first.

The above would obviously be a political death wish, but my point here is maybe we need to start talking about whether a constant pursuit of living longer with a disregard for quality of life is sensible for one's own quality of life and the financial burden it has on the country? Personally if I ever get dementia or something of the sort, I would rather go to an "old man's friend party" and hope for the "worst", than spend several years not knowing who I am, what's going on, putting an emotional and physical strain on close friends and family, and exhausting the taxpayer and/or personal wealth to live like a zombie. I accept not everyone agrees, but others will no doubt.

I do not think euthanasia could be made mandatory. However as discussed this thread it should be made legal with individuals given the opportunity to set out the conditions / thresholds where they want their life be terminated - see my post.

At this point I think there needs to be a big public inquiry into the NHS, its structure, where in the NHS the money goes, where costs can be saved, how they can be paid for and who pays most for what. Something is definitely wrong.

PFI of buildings is one. A huge cost just to keep it off the government debt / borrowing figure. If money has to be borrowed the state ought to be able to get the lowest rate.

 

[brad465]

I do not think euthanasia could be made mandatory. However as discussed this thread it should be made legal with individuals given the opportunity to set out the conditions / thresholds where they want their life be terminated - see my post.

Apologies if not clear, but I was exaggerating that a bit, hence saying to do it would be a political death wish. I agree legalising it for terminal illness would not be though, and recent cases of countries like Spain and New Zealand doing so in special cases suggests it can be supported.

 

[WizCastro197]

Can't be the only one who feels there is nothing much coming out of this Government? There is practically no news anymore about actual help for the most vulnerable people? Sure, they aided earlier but it seems everything has gone completely silent.

 

[brad465]

He probably didn't have much choice in the matter:

Matt Hancock to stand down as MP amid local criticism

It comes as some Tory members in his Suffolk constituency say the MP is "not fit to represent" them.

www.bbc.co.uk

Former Health Secretary Matt Hancock has announced he will not be standing as an MP at the next general election.
He was suspended as a Conservative MP after taking part in the ITV reality show I'm A Celebrity.
In a letter to Rishi Sunak, Mr Hancock said he had "discovered a whole new world of possibilities which I am excited to explore".
He added that politicians need to find "new ways to reach people" outside Parliament.
He concluded his letter by saying it had been "an honour to serve in Parliament and represent the people of West Suffolk".
"I will play my part in the debate about the future of our country and engage with the public in new ways," he said.

 

[ainsworth74]

Can't be the only one who feels there is nothing much coming out of this Government? There is practically no news anymore about actual help for the most vulnerable people? Sure, they aided earlier but it seems everything has gone completely silent.

Yes I've noticed that too. Perhaps I'm being uncharitable but just what is the programme for Government? What are the policy ideas? What's the grand design? Everything just feels reactive or just mushy. Perhaps I'm just much more politically plugged in now than I was for the 2010 - 2016 administration but it just feels like from 2017 onwards and especially since 2020 that we're just rudderless in a way we weren't before. There is no programme. Okay I can forgive 2020 and early 2021 as the Pandemic rather got in the way but it hasn't felt like the last eighteen months there's been any sort of direction. It's still just lurching from one crisis to the next. I suppose you could argue that Truss was an attempt at doing just that but I'm not sure that dumpster fire really qualifies!

It seems like there are big problems. Things like NHS waiting lists, industrial relations on the railways and elsewhere, education, energy, the continuing collapse of the criminal justice system, national security/defence, deprivation, etc etc. But all we seem to get is either nothing or little more than hot air which very rarely actually leads to legislation and policy action. Like I said it could just be that since Brexit I've become much more politically switched on, I always took an interest but far more now than I did before, so perhaps it's always felt like this?

 

[brad465]

Yes I've noticed that too. Perhaps I'm being uncharitable but just what is the programme for Government? What are the policy ideas? What's the grand design? Everything just feels reactive or just mushy. Perhaps I'm just much more politically plugged in now than I was for the 2010 - 2016 administration but it just feels like from 2017 onwards and especially since 2020 that we're just rudderless in a way we weren't before. There is no programme. Okay I can forgive 2020 and early 2021 as the Pandemic rather got in the way but it hasn't felt like the last eighteen months there's been any sort of direction. It's still just lurching from one crisis to the next. I suppose you could argue that Truss was an attempt at doing just that but I'm not sure that dumpster fire really qualifies!

It seems like there are big problems. Things like NHS waiting lists, industrial relations on the railways and elsewhere, education, energy, the continuing collapse of the criminal justice system, national security/defence, deprivation, etc etc. But all we seem to get is either nothing or little more than hot air which very rarely actually leads to legislation and policy action. Like I said it could just be that since Brexit I've become much more politically switched on, I always took an interest but far more now than I did before, so perhaps it's always felt like this?

I've also noticed it and mentioned this in one of the strike action threads with regards to why they might not be being solved for industrial action across all sectors. My thinking is that Sunak and co. are resigned to losing the next election; current opinion polling is comparable to the polling after Black Wednesday, where even a relatively successful economy in the last years of Major could not stop a landslide defeat, and while polling will likely narrow, there's a long way to go. Therefore, they could well believe that there is no real point in doing anything beyond the very minimum necessary, as it will all be in vain come 2024/5, but it's not possible to know for sure without reading their minds.

 

[jfollows]

Matt Hancock announced that he's not going to stand at the next election, putting a spin on the story that he's chosen not to stand and that he's going to "explore new ways to communicate with people" but in fact his local Conservative association, West Suffolk Conservatives, has written a letter - not due to be published in the Newmarket Journal until tomorrow - to the effect that "they consider Matt Hancock not fit to represent this constituency". So he was about to be kicked out is the long and the short of it. Full story on https://twitter.com/KateMaltby

 

[DynamicSpirit]

Yes I've noticed that too. Perhaps I'm being uncharitable but just what is the programme for Government? What are the policy ideas? What's the grand design? Everything just feels reactive or just mushy. Perhaps I'm just much more politically plugged in now than I was for the 2010 - 2016 administration but it just feels like from 2017 onwards and especially since 2020 that we're just rudderless in a way we weren't before. There is no programme. Okay I can forgive 2020 and early 2021 as the Pandemic rather got in the way but it hasn't felt like the last eighteen months there's been any sort of direction. It's still just lurching from one crisis to the next. I suppose you could argue that Truss was an attempt at doing just that but I'm not sure that dumpster fire really qualifies!

The sense I get is that Rishi Sunak is basically a technocrat. He'll keep the country ticking over and make sure we move towards balancing the books. We won't see the self-made drama and constant crises of the Boris and Truss eras - and likewise, there probably wont' be any huge scandals under his leadership (well at least, no scandals that he originates. Doesn't guarantee there won't be any caused by the behaviour of other ministers etc.). But on the other hand, you're correct - there's no big passionate vision for the direction he wants to take the country in. A complete contrast with Liz Truss - who definitely did have a vision for how she wanted the UK to be (with the minor problem that parts of her vision were bonkers and even for the sensible parts, she was totally reckless/silly in the way she set about pursuing it).

 

[edwin_m]

The sense I get is that Rishi Sunak is basically a technocrat. He'll keep the country ticking over and make sure we move towards balancing the books. We won't see the self-made drama and constant crises of the Boris and Truss eras - and likewise, there probably wont' be any huge scandals under his leadership (well at least, no scandals that he originates. Doesn't guarantee there won't be any caused by the behaviour of other ministers etc.). But on the other hand, you're correct - there's no big passionate vision for the direction he wants to take the country in. A complete contrast with Liz Truss - who definitely did have a vision for how she wanted the UK to be (with the minor problem that parts of her vision were bonkers and even for the sensible parts, she was totally reckless/silly in the way she set about pursuing it).

There's also likely to be tension between Sunak and the ERG, who have enough votes to make his life a misery if they choose to. The sorts of policies that are needed to get the economy moving are anathema to the right wing.

 

[WizCastro197]

He probably didn't have much choice in the matter:

Matt Hancock to stand down as MP amid local criticism

It comes as some Tory members in his Suffolk constituency say the MP is "not fit to represent" them.

www.bbc.co.uk

I thought they had had to announce to Conservative HQ by 5th December? Unless he has done that and the announcement is delayed.

 

[Thirteen]

He probably didn't have much choice in the matter:

Matt Hancock to stand down as MP amid local criticism

It comes as some Tory members in his Suffolk constituency say the MP is "not fit to represent" them.

www.bbc.co.uk

Honestly I suspect it was a case of stand again as an independent and lose or step down. I'm sure Hancock has post politics plans after his success on IAC.

 

[jfollows]

I thought they had had to announce to Conservative HQ by 5th December? Unless he has done that and the announcement is delayed.

Whilst I agree with what you're saying, I don't think there's anything stopping a sitting MP confirming his/her intention to stand by 5th. December and subsequently deciding not to. Apart from reputational damage, if that matters.
So Hancock may have already signalled his intention to stand, and indeed one of his "gophers" was asked the question by a reporter recently and "confirmed" that he was going to. Indeed, from 13:53 at https://www.theguardian.com/politic...39098ec8f08aedcdc7dee83&filterKeyEvents=false:

Matt Hancock’s decision not to fight the next general election is not really shock news at Westminster. After his toe-curling adventures in the reality TV jungle, it was assumed he had no route back to the top of politics.

But the announcement may come as a surprise to anyone who made the mistake of believing Matt Hancock’s own spokesperson. Only last week, in response to a Sun story, the spokesperson told Sky News:

Matt has no intention of standing down or stepping away from politics and there has been no conversation with Mayah Riaz or any other PR.

 

[Gloster]

As said in #377, there is to be a redistribution of seats in Suffolk and Hancock was not guaranteed one of the new ones. Presumably he realised that nobody was likely to want him, other than than Ms Coladangelo, and so he quit to avoid another public humiliation, which, unlike those in Australia, he wouldn’t get paid for.

 

[Thirteen]

I assume Hancock will be appearing as a political pundit in the next few years as well as a stint presenting something like Good Morning Britain.

 

[Meole]

I assume Hancock will be appearing as a political pundit in the next few years as well as a stint presenting something like Good Morning Britain.

A number of successful covid protective suppliers may give him a directorship etc for services rendered.

 

[Busaholic]

I thought they had had to announce to Conservative HQ by 5th December? Unless he has done that and the announcement is delayed.

Or it's the usual Tory ''it doesn't apply to me'' reaction. Actually, I'd be surprised if his 'late call' didn't relate to the enquiry, including by police, into Baroness Mone's affairs, which are sure to incorporate the actions by Hancock's former Department in securing a contract or contracts for companies controlled by her. Rishi Sunak's paltry reply to Keir Starmer's questions in the Commons today won't have convinced Hancock that he has any interest in saving the bacon of this cut-price Frank Spencer.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 7 Dec 2022 ==

Or it's the usual Tory ''it doesn't apply to me'' reaction. Actually, I'd be surprised if his 'late call' didn't relate to the enquiry, including by police, into Baroness Mone's affairs, which are sure to incorporate the actions by Hancock's former Department in securing a contract or contracts for companies controlled by her. Rishi Sunak's paltry reply to Keir Starmer's questions in the Commons today won't have convinced Hancock that he has any interest in saving the bacon of this cut-price Frank Spencer, and why should he?

 

[nw1]

I've also noticed it and mentioned this in one of the strike action threads with regards to why they might not be being solved for industrial action across all sectors. My thinking is that Sunak and co. are resigned to losing the next election; current opinion polling is comparable to the polling after Black Wednesday, where even a relatively successful economy in the last years of Major could not stop a landslide defeat, and while polling will likely narrow, there's a long way to go. Therefore, they could well believe that there is no real point in doing anything beyond the very minimum necessary, as it will all be in vain come 2024/5, but it's not possible to know for sure without reading their minds.

Then, if they really can't be bothered because they will probably lose, they should do the right thing, call an election early (i.e. the coming spring), and let someone else have a go with the knowledge they have 4 or 5 years ahead of them!

People might respect them more then, giving them more chance of getting in again in 2028, or whenever.

 

[Thirteen]

Then, if they really can't be bothered because they will probably lose, they should do the right thing, call an election early (i.e. the coming spring), and let someone else have a go with the knowledge they have 4 or 5 years ahead of them!

People might respect them more then, giving them more chance of getting in again in 2028, or whenever.

I suspect Sunak probably want a bit more than seven months as PM so Spring 2024 is more likely.

 

[nw1]

I suspect Sunak probably want a bit more than seven months as PM so Spring 2024 is more likely.

I realise that I'm being wildly optimistic about an election soon, but just voicing the opinion that it would be the best thing for the country if they "just go" sooner rather than later. This tired old government appears to offer nothing.

 

[birchesgreen]

So Hancock will be in Strictly next year then.

 

[brad465]

So Hancock will be in Strictly next year then.

And whoever he is partnered with better be prepared to taste him

 

[Gloster]

If one is really cynical (me, never!), you might wonder if a number of MPs do not want to continue after the next election, but are standing because if they don’t they won’t get the Loss of Office payment. Admittedly it is not that much for all but the longest sitting MPs, being double the statutory redundancy payment. Still, ever little helps. Watch for a few incredibly ham-fisted campaigns.

 

[Thirteen]

If one is really cynical (me, never!), you might wonder if a number of MPs do not want to continue after the next election, but are standing because if they don’t they won’t get the Loss of Office payment. Admittedly it is not that much for all but the longest sitting MPs, being double the statutory redundancy payment. Still, ever little helps. Watch for a few incredibly ham-fisted campaigns.

It probably depends on the MP. The older MPs are retiring so will get a pension out of it so no need for a Loss of Office payment.

Some like Javid and Hancock will likely have lucrative post politics careers so don't need the Loss of Office Payment.