General Election 2015 - Thoughts/Predictions/Results

[DynamicSpirit]

And Miliband constantly whining on about personal insults just demonstrates he isn't up to the job. He won't be able to go running to mummy crying that the big boys are being horrible to him when he is supposed to be standing up for the UK against the likes of Merkel, Obama or Putin.

Miliband does not 'whine about personal insults'. And you do yourself no credit when you write this kind of fiction.

EDIT: And of course there's the additional irony that - after I pointed out that the Conservatives have made personal insults a significant part of their campaign, you've responded with - hey, yes, more personal insults. And you've apparently missed the basic point that personal insults isn't really something a responsible political party should be doing (and yes, I know Labour have been just as guilty of that in the past, and that is in my view also very regrettable. But at least Labour haven't (so far) made personal insults a core part of this election campaign).
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

We've done this to death on this thread already. Despite Labour's usual attempts to blame everyone else, their whole economic plan was built on a bubble of debt that was unsustainable. Unfortunately Brown had convinced himself that he'd abolished boom and bust, and was still spending and borrowing well into the crash and beyond, putting nothing away for the rainy days that he'd proclaimed would never come. So we fared a lot worse than other countries who were less reckless.

I fear that in your enthusiasm to find any excuse, no matter, how ill-founded, to slag off Labour, you've completely missed the point of my post.

I wasn't particularly trying to raise the issue of the economy again (but yes, I did use it as an example), I was trying to draw attention to the irony/inconsistency of Oswyntail complaining of 'their dishonesty and lack of intellectual rigour' on Labour's part when he (as far as I'm aware) supports a party that also displays 'dishonesty and lack of intellectual rigour' in abundance. That wasn't by the way in itself intended as any particular defence of Labour - in my view all the parties are guilty of this problem to some extent.

But since you apparently wish to bring the discussion back to the economy, I might at least correct a couple of misconceptions on your part. The national debt when Labour left office was around 70% of GDP. There's no particular reason to believe that's an unsustainable level (especially while interest rates have become such an apparently semi-permanent feature of the UK economy) - it's been far higher than that I in the past. When the recession came, we fared better than some countries, worse than others. From what I've seen of the figures, our growth dropped to just below minus 2% during the recession, which was somewhat typical of many industrialized countries - so you cannot really deduce from that there was anything particularly bad about Labour's handling of the economy, at least in comparison to other countries.

Given that Ed Milliband and Ed Balls appear to be adopting a rather different approach to the economy than did Gordon Brown, I'm not sure how relevant this is to the current election anyway.

 

[table38]

Miliband does not 'whine about personal insults'. And you do yourself no credit when you write this kind of fiction.

Just because it doesn't accord with Labour's version of the truth doesn't make it fiction. Miliband has been whining on about "the nasty Tories" to anyone who will listen since Fallon pointed out what he did to his brother.

If Miliband can't stand the heat, he should stay out of both of his two kitchens

Given that Ed Milliband and Ed Balls appear to be adopting a rather different approach to the economy than did Gordon Brown, I'm not sure how relevant this is to the current election anyway.

Maybe because both Miliband and Balls were at various times part of Brown's treasury team.

And because Labour still don't think they did anything wrong, which means they would just be doomed to make the same mistake.

 

[Butts]

So if the remuneration is so amazing, why are doctors leaving general practice in record numbers?

The issue, despite yet more Tory spin, is a lack of GPs not a lack of gumption. Out-of-hours issues are, of course, because out-of-hours care was privatised. Amazingly the quality went down and the cost went up. Never saw that one coming.

I don't know which part of Yorkshire you're in, but it is a similar story (although not to the London extreme) with my parents' practice in south-west Bradford.

That said, please don't confuse me for a Labour supporter; never voted for them in my life.

I wonder how many people realise that the forerunners of GP's were against the introduction of The NHS and had to be bribed in order to participate.

Also as I understand it they are effectively "Private Contractors" and not employed directly by The Health Service hence privatisation has existed since the inception of the NHS.

Strikes me this is positively "Bransonesque Spin" with regard to their Hierarchical and Saint like standing

 

[radamfi]

Whether Milliband or Cameron or whoever is "prime ministerial material" is neither here nor there. Any prime minister will have endless advisers, more or less telling them what to do every minute of the day.

 

[Tetchytyke]

GPs are no saints, but my point still stands: if Labour gave them loads more money for doing loads less work, which is the Tory line, why are they leaving the profession in their droves? People don't leave industries where they get a shed load of money for old rope.

IME the problems in A&E are because people can't access a GP. But I guess it is easier for the Tories to claim that it's really because people (especially those pesky Polish) are too thick to use A&E appropriately.

As for an "economy based on debt", Osborne has borrowed more in four years than Labour did in 13, almost doubling the national debt. Most of his new policies are about getting the taxpayer to underwrite loans to private individuals (e.g. green fund, help to buy) or selling charitable assets off at an undervalue (right to buy). If someone could explain how Help to Buy isn't using taxpayer money to keep a bubble of debt afloat, I'd be grateful to hear them.

 

[TheEdge]

IME the problems in A&E are because people can't access a GP. But I guess it is easier for the Tories to claim that it's really because people (especially those pesky Polish) are too thick to use A&E appropriately.

This. At my current doctors surgery the waiting time for non urgent appointments is a week at least! Even worse was an incident at my old doctors. I was a registered patient but the surgery also operated the drop in centre for Norfolk. Tried to book an appointment and was told it was a long wait but then that it was quiet there and if I came in as a drop in patient I would be (and was) seen on the same day.

The NHS is one of the most important and best things about the UK and previous and current governments are letting it go to *****. Needs to be stopped.

 

[ExRes]

This. At my current doctors surgery the waiting time for non urgent appointments is a week at least! Even worse was an incident at my old doctors. I was a registered patient but the surgery also operated the drop in centre for Norfolk. Tried to book an appointment and was told it was a long wait but then that it was quiet there and if I came in as a drop in patient I would be (and was) seen on the same day.

The NHS is one of the most important and best things about the UK and previous and current governments are letting it go to *****. Needs to be stopped.

I now live in a town stacked to the roof with retirees, at the end of last week I was able to make an appointment with a two day wait, one of four available, with numerous others available over the following two days and that was just online availability, the end of the world scenario has obviously not reached this corner of England yet

 

[Johnuk123]

I now live in a town stacked to the roof with retirees, at the end of last week I was able to make an appointment with a two day wait, one of four available, with numerous others available over the following two days and that was just online availability, the end of the world scenario has obviously not reached this corner of England yet

As long as you ring between 08.30 and 09.00 am at my doctors you'll always get a same day appointment no bother.

Despite what the scaremongers say the gp system is not in chaos, doctors are similar to teachers in that they are never ever happy unless they're in a self obsessed crisis.

 

[northwichcat]

As long as you ring between 08.30 and 09.00 am at my doctors you'll always get a same day appointment no bother.

With my doctors if you want a same day appointment it's usually a process of:

• Phone at 08:30. Line engaged.
  
• Phone at 08:33. Line engaged.
  
• Phone at 08:35. Ringing tone for about 12 rings. Someone eventually answers.
  
• Ask for an appointment with any doctor as soon as possible.
  
• Receptionist offers an appointment in 2-3 days.
  
• Try to persuade receptionist that I need an appointment more urgently than that.
  
• Receptionist says she can squeeze me in at the end of morning/afternoon surgery.
  
• Turn up at surgery and find 2-3 other people have been given an appointment with the same doctor at the same time.
  
• Get to see a doctor around 30 minutes later than the time I was given.

 

[Oswyntail]

GPs are no saints, but my point still stands: if Labour gave them loads more money for doing loads less work, which is the Tory line, why are they leaving the profession in their droves? People don't leave industries where they get a shed load of money for old rope.

The GMC figures suggest that GP numbers are steadily increasing http://www.gmc-uk.org/doctors/register/search_stats.asp

IME the problems in A&E are because people can't access a GP. But I guess it is easier for the Tories to claim that it's really because people (especially those pesky Polish) are too thick to use A&E appropriately.
.

Put those swivel-eyes back in their sockets! No one has claimed anyone is "too thick". But we do seem to have a "me first" society currently, where, if you can't get your sore throat seen by a GP of your choice on the day it starts, you go along to A&E. At my practice, more people are coming in with ailments they would have shrugged off ten years ago, and demanding full GP consultations. Is it better policy to see all those for the full ten minutes, or try and educate people back into the correct use of the services?

 

[me123]

The problems in A&E are mostly from two sources.

Firstly, there are a huge number of inappropriate attendances that would be more appropriately seen by a GP, or in many cases even a community pharmacist. Coughs, colds, and chronic problems, quite simply should not be seen in A&E. This needs to be tackled both with increased patient education and increased funding for the alternative services that patients need to go to. I honestly think we should also be turning people back at the front door in the most extreme cases. It really is quite simple people - if it's neither an accident nor an emergency, then don't go to an accident & emergency department!

Secondly, for the genuine A&E patients who do need admission, there's often issues getting the patient from A&E to the appropriate ward. Many acute hospital wards have a large number of patients who are not acutely unwell and have no medical indication for being in hospital. Instead, they're waiting for care at home, or their relatives are suddenly unable to look after them any longer, or they're awaiting a care home/guardianship order/rehabilitation bed etc etc etc. Some of them are there for weeks, or even months on end. There must be thousands of patients like this throughout the UK blocking acute hospital beds each and every day, when in reality they would be better looked after in the community (either at home with care, or in a peripheral/community hospital). The impact for A&Es is that the patients end up stuck in an A&E department, blocking a bed there and taking resources away from the acutely unwell patients, when they'd be best looked after on an appropriate ward. In the most extreme cases, they can't even get a bed in the hospital they've been admitted to and have to wait for an ambulance to take them elsewhere.

In many cases, pressures on A&E and acute hospitals are often created more by factors out with their control. In particular, I suspect that lots of A&Es that "fail" in their 4 hour target are able to see and treat patients within four hours, but fail to get them out of the department within that time. The best way to solve thee issues is to target funding at community care; in the form of GPs, district/community nurses, community/rehabilitation hospitals, and home carers.

 

[Tetchytyke]

You're entirely correct about bed blocking. It's in social care where the local authority budget cuts are really hitting hard.

About seven years ago I used to work in community care law and even then we saw plenty of arguments where the hospital wouldn't discharge without care but social services were adamant they didn't need it. It's only getting worse as budgets get slashed.

The disaster that is A&E is a weather vane for the other effects of Gideon's so-called "austerity", which appears to be defined as "no money for essential services, but hundreds of billions for egotrips like HS2".

 

[yorksrob]

On the subject of doctors, I'm surprised that no party has mentioned the policy of medical drop in centres from a few years ago. I'm sure it would have relieved some of the pressure on Doctors surgeries.

The one in the centre of Leeds closed a couple of years ago for some reason. The receptionist who told me (it had reverted to an ordinary doctors surgery when I visited) admitted that they still had several enquiries for the drop in centre a day.

NHS Direct would have relieved some pressure as well, but I understand that that has been replaced by less effective version as well.

 

[MidlandMainlie]

On the subject of doctors, I'm surprised that no party has mentioned the policy of medical drop in centres from a few years ago. I'm sure it would have relieved some of the pressure on Doctors surgeries.

The one in the centre of Leeds closed a couple of years ago for some reason. The receptionist who told me (it had reverted to an ordinary doctors surgery when I visited) admitted that they still had several enquiries for the drop in centre a day.

NHS Direct would have relieved some pressure as well, but I understand that that has been replaced by less effective version as well.

Our local Hospital has a drop in centre located next door to A&E, it provided excellent service when I need to see a doctor for non emergency treatment but couldn't get an appointment to see my GP because it was a Saturday. All hospitals should have one at weekends for non emergency treatment.

 

[yorksrob]

Our local Hospital has a drop in centre located next door to A&E, it provided excellent service when I need to see a doctor for non emergency treatment but couldn't get an appointment to see my GP because it was a Saturday. All hospitals should have one at weekends for non emergency treatment.

Indeed. This would seem to be a pretty good solution to me.

 

[Oswyntail]

.....The disaster that is A&E is a weather vane for the other effects of Gideon's so-called "austerity", which appears to be defined as "no money for essential services, but hundreds of billions for egotrips like HS2".

a) The A&E services across the board are not a "disaster" by any definition of the word
b) Revenue v capital expenditure.

...NHS Direct would have relieved some pressure as well, but I understand that that has been replaced by less effective version as well.

Again, in general the 111 service is working as well if not better than NHS Direct. Particular areas, though, are not.

 

[telstarbox]

Did anyone see the BBC debate last night?

 

[MidlandMainlie]

Did anyone see the BBC debate last night?

Watched it all. Milliband came across quite well I thought, but so did Nicola Sturgeon. Nigel Farage lost the debate when he insulted the audience accusing them of a being selected by the BBC with a left wing bias. :roll: (David Dimbleby was forced to step in and say the audience had been selected by an independent polling organisation to be representative of British views).

 

[PaulLothian]

A rather better debate than I expected.

Nicola Sturgeon appears to have once again done a good job in explaining that the SNP would be pursuing an agenda of socially responsible management of the financial deficit, and that the SNP will be in Westminster to contribute.

Ed Milliband once again working hard to appear statesman-like, (but I do wish someone would tell him to vary his hand-gestures!) but rather spoilt it by a slightly petulant rejection of SNP support at the end, leaving a sense that he would almost rather not take on government if he had to share it.

Nigel Farage was Nigel Farage - I don't suppose he cared about having successfully alienated the audience as I suspect he wasn't really talking to them.

Leanne Woods and Natalie Bennett were both solid performers, but in truth about as far on the fringe as Farage in terms of likely impact on the future shape of government.

Still would put money on a Labour-SNP arrangement of some sort if I was a gambling man!

 

[Tetchytyke]

Nigel Farage wasn't talking to the people in the audience, or 80% of the audience at home for that matter. He was talking to his core demographic- whingey white old men who think that the world should have stopped in 1956 and that anyone who disagrees is a commie pinko gay.

a) The A&E services across the board are not a "disaster" by any definition of the word

That'll be why West Midlands Ambulance service ran out of ambulances at the weekend, because paramedics were having to treat people in hospital corridors due to A&E services falling over. Again.

That'll also be why nearly 12% of people who attend the main A&E centres do not get treated within four hours, and that this figure has risen by almost 300% since 2010.

 

[ExRes]

Nigel Farage wasn't talking to the people in the audience, or 80% of the audience at home for that matter. He was talking to his core demographic- whingey white old men who think that the world should have stopped in 1956 and that anyone who disagrees is a commie pinko gay..

Now that's what I call an adult view and not putting people into groups at all, I assume you wish to do away with democracy as well?

 

[Tetchytyke]

I assume you wish to do away with democracy as well?

It's perfectly possible to think someone has unfortunate political views whilst defending their right to express them, you know

 

[Oswyntail]

.....
That'll be why West Midlands Ambulance service ran out of ambulances at the weekend, because paramedics were having to treat people in hospital corridors due to A&E services falling over. Again.

That'll also be why nearly 12% of people who attend the main A&E centres do not get treated within four hours, and that this figure has risen by almost 300% since 2010.

Across the board, this is by no means a "disaster". There are problems, of course, as in any reactive service; and waiting time targets are somewhat debatable anyway, as their chequered history has shown. And, of course, you speak of "West Midlands" - a significantly large area; others might check the reports that refer to one hospital in Worcester

 

[ExRes]

It's perfectly possible to think someone has unfortunate political views whilst defending their right to express them, you know

My mistake, I thought only certain posters were allowed to express their opinions

"whingey white old men who think that the world should have stopped in 1956 and that anyone who disagrees is a commie pinko gay" is just your unfortunate political view I assume

 

[Butts]

I saw the debate last night and once again Nicola Sturgeon came across extremely well. My thoughts turned to what the effect of having Alex Salmond there instead would have been.

She has certainly come out of his shadow since the Referendum and possibly eclipsed him. It's hard to remember she is actually not a Candidate in the forthcoming election.

One again if I were Northern Irish I would have been extremely disappointed at the lack of representation from my part of the UK. Parties there with quite a few seats both Unionist and Catholic playing second fiddle to The Greens, Plaid Cymru, UKIP and even at it's current standing the SNP who were barely represented in the outgoing Parliament.

 

[deltic]

Compared to the three ladies Ed Milliband came across as a right of centre politician and may have picked up some support. Nigel Farage missed his chance in David Cameron's absence to come across as the alternative right of centre party. As many politicians have done there is no point in just appealing to your hard core support which will still be there whatever you say you need to reach out to those you might just persuade to vote for you.

Cameron was the clear loser last night - I hadnt appreciated that not only had be chickened out of appearing himself but prevented Nick Clegg from doing so as well - an appalling attitude for someone who is meant to believe in democracy

 

[Peter Mugridge]

Farage has apparently accused the BBC of choosing the wrong polling company to select the studio audience for last night.

What? Just because the audience didn’t like the things he was saying?! What next? Will he have a go on the same grounds at every newspaper that prints a poll showing he’s not in the lead?

 

[Tetchytyke]

My mistake, I thought only certain posters were allowed to express their opinions

Ah yes, that's the other default kipper whine, when they're not blaming the Polish for everything.

"The pinko commie BBC are trying to shut us down and BAN DEMOCRACY".

As I said, whingey old white men who wish the world had stopped in 1956.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

Ah yes, that's the other default kipper whine, when they're not blaming the Polish for everything.

"The pinko commie BBC are trying to shut us down and BAN DEMOCRACY".

As I said, whingey old white men who wish the world had stopped in 1956.

UKIP has many policies that I regard as potentially disastrous, and has often campaigned in a way that I personally find vindictive and very unpleasant. However, insulting all the people who vote for them in the way you are doing is (a) factually wrong, because people doubtless vote UKIP for all sorts of different reasons, (b) in my view ethically wrong, for the obvious reason that insulting anyone tends to be wrong, and (c) unlikely to be effective as a way of persuading people to support your views.

There are plenty of good rational arguments for why UKIPs views are bad. Why not use those instead of resorting to insults?

 

[Oswyntail]

....Cameron was the clear loser last night - I hadnt appreciated that not only had be chickened out of appearing himself but prevented Nick Clegg from doing so as well - an appalling attitude for someone who is meant to believe in democracy

An alternative view might be that, as these "debates" were predictably nothing of the sort, he realised that, had he been there, there would have been nothing but "Tories are rubbish" blah. As it was,there was plenty of that, but, given enough rope, none of the participants was able to offer a convincing view of the next few years.
Democracy would be better served if the various parties trusted the electorate and simply said what they would do to run, or help in running, the country. Incumbent parties are always going to say "much of the same",so it is up to other parties to offer their vision. None has yet done that.