Results are out! Find what you need...fast. Get quick advice or join the chat
Hey there! Sign in to have your say on this topicNew here? Join for free to post

Ask a TSR Liberal Democrat

This thread is sponsored by:
Announcements Posted on
    • 32 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    We need to have a full and frank discussion on which way we are going to move on the DQT amendment.

    Your comments about TSR UKIP, making serious accusations that toronto353 made up the fact In addition to your determination to personally revoke the government's mandate have been extremely unhelpful in the wake of my efforts to try and get the necessary support from the government in the wake of Labour concerns.


    Though I am Deputy Chief Whip in the government, and in the role of Constitutional Reform secretary, I have been able to secure government support for several of the amendments planned so far, and on DQTs, was getting some early support from the government. Something which has quickly evaporated.

    Your comments were out of order, and totally uncalled for. For amendments to work, a positive relationship is required, and making general nasty comments about the people in government. On top of this, you made a serious allegation which has been proven not to be from someone in the government. On top of this, you tried to implicate the government in something which you admitted you began.

    Put honestly, some of the comments you have made have now started to come home to roost within the government and what you have said has made everything really difficult for me in relation to the amendment and whereas I've tried to stick up for you, the habitual nature of the comments you make has quickly meant that the situation has escaped my control.

    There are a number of MPs in the government now prepared to offer a total veto to this amendment in the wake of the comments that you have made. In addition, there are members now not keen for me to offer my secondary to this amendment. Something I feel that I will be obliged to review now after your comments.

    This is not a whole government view, but it isn't a minority view either.

    On top of this, there are those in the government who hold the view that you should now consider your position as the Liberal Democrat 'leader'.

    Again this is not a whole government view, far from it, but is not a minute view and it is a view which is growing within the government.

    That is a great matter of sadness for me, toronto and all of our colleagues in UKIP haven't been able to hold and enjoy a great working relationship between our two parties which traditionally have been close friends. However your conduct towards us has been very poor. Trying to eject us from office, and making accusations that we lied unfortunately we cannot tolerate and I agree with toronto's reluctant stance which you have now obliged him to take. It is difficult to see those relations improving. In particular, your determination to minimise the apology that you really do owe UKIP and in particular toronto for calling him a liar means that we reluctantly feel that you genuinely are not apologetic for your poor conduct.

    As a colleague to you (and remember I'm someone who has been in the shoes you currently occupy) , I believe that you must consider resigning your position now. For it is now in the interest of aiding Constitutional Reform that you should do so.

    My view is that while you remain the Lib Dem leader then any Constitutional Reform which you offer any support to will be immediately jeapordised, especially if this potential veto grows which unless your conduct in the house improves, it will do. That will make it hard for all of us Constitutional Reformists and make many potential projects absolutely worthless. Including the House of Lords project, from which members are offering resignations from due to your conduct.

    If you do resign as Liberal Democrat leader then you can focus all your endeavours on the Constitutional Reform of the MHoC. In a term where there are a number of amendments likely to be proposed, you can play a key role in developing how the house operates. With a potential House of Lords being mooted. This term is going to have a huge amount of constitutional discussion. And it is very important to have those with the genuine interest in it, to be able to work and develop this House without any distractions, as repeated speculation anyway surrounding your position as Lib Dem leader is likely to create
    .
    I believe that if you were to offer to seriously consider and review your position as Liberal Democrat 'leader' then I can try to secure a position within the government where they would not seek to hinder the amendment's debate and discussion.

    You naturally have the right to make your own response in what you should wish to do. But I must advise you that there is no prospect at present of the Departmental Question Time amendment receiving anything approaching the votes to pass into the Guidance Document, let alone the 34 needed to be able to pass into the HoC constitution. Likewise, I'd have to review my position in respect of my colleagues.

    However like I said, the decision will remain yours. But I hope you will truly bear in mind what I have said in the interest of the Constitutional Reforms that we need to improve the House.
    • 39 followers
    Online

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by misterxninja)
    Perhaps, perhaps. I know the two girls who defected they had led the university party between them in Leeds CF - I enjoy good social relationships with the lot of them personal level. Having your leadership go is pretty big and pretty bad, another one is almost about to jump ship over also despite just gaining a position on Leeds CF executive.

    It is happening and trending everywhere, your getting squashed on the right and the left. Time will tell won't it, if we take some MP's of yours in the coalition breakup then that is a threat in itself and a likelihood, some of your ministers have been quoted as saying they prefer to work with the Lib Dems than other members on there backbenches - big cause big concern big threat. Ignore it until you end up with the Lib Dems also Rakas, as you find everyone in your party you agreed with made the jump.

    Too think some of you Tories were actually expecting Lib Dems to defect like Clegg and David Laws and Danny Alexander. Oh how the tables have turned, Clegg truly is a political mastermind you will see - there as Liberal as a good chunk of your market MP's are and starting to realise after working with them.
    True, i come to most of the official CF events and i can't say i ever knew who the other committee members were. That said, you know as well as i do that young members in particular tend to jump parties and until we see a big group (5% of MPs) i will not be too concerned. Never knew anybody else was defecting from Leeds, bit pointless being elected.

    I'm not surprised that some cabinet members say that as i would probably be one of those given my similarities to the Lib Dem right however that to me does not make me think that they are going to jump. If that point does come then fair enough, but i do not see it coming.

    Only idiots expected Clegg ect.. to defect.

    I like Clegg but i would'nt go that far.
    • 9 followers
    Online

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by toronto353)
    I think we're getting there. Time's a great healer, but as I say, I've been in touch with the Lib Dem leadership team to rebuild those links and it is a very positive atmosphere at the moment.
    and likewise I've had a LD PM me offering to work with me as a main point of contact. And I'm more than happy to work with him on that.
    • 12 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Matthew_Lowson)
    and likewise I've had a LD PM me offering to work with me as a main point of contact. And I'm more than happy to work with him on that.
    So why don't you go away stop shooting yourself in the foot and do that... You really are sideshow bob walking into countless rakes on a daily basis. Instead of carrying something sorted out on because you have a sore bottom...

    We are talking about health policy and electoral strategy and optimisms and realisms and the future of RL party politics in a really interesting constructive way and Health. Join in constructively or take your antagonism to some other party you hate, your opinion is not wanted or considered here - as you repeatedly throw lumps of political excrement at us for no reason other than your bottom is sore from the past and you have a vendetta against the Lib Dems because we got rid of you because your a nuisance. So stop being a nuisance now to everyone else and your new party and sit down and be quiet for a change.
    • 17 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by misterxninja)
    This is what happens at dentists and opticians I still get my opticians and dentist free. Groups like full time students would continue to get free and those working and earning pay as they need and go, so only the unhealthy need to be concerned. This gets rid of self inflicted dependency culture burdening the healthy. We can then give a tax break to society and stimulate the economy as people will have more money to spend into the economy.
    Continue? Students aren't entitled to free prescriptions. In the assessment, students loans get counted as 'income' (i know there's a separate section for it but it still gets counted towards that). So, if you get how much they say you need to survive on loan (£50 a week, IIRC?) then you're not entitled to free prescriptions.

    I know this because for the past 3 years i've had to buy a prescription prepayment certificate. It's a joke, what type of income do you have to repay?

    Moreover, they typically work this out over how long a student year is, which means that £50 goes significantly lower when you work out the extra costs when you have to provide for yourself during the extra time. Once i've paid my bills, and bought food, i barely have enough to live off; i really can't afford the extra £10ish a month for a PPC. In fact, there was an instance where i had to go without my medication for a month because of this.
    • 12 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rakas21)
    True, i come to most of the official CF events and i can't say i ever knew who the other committee members were. That said, you know as well as i do that young members in particular tend to jump parties and until we see a big group (5% of MPs) i will not be too concerned. Never knew anybody else was defecting from Leeds, bit pointless being elected.

    I'm not surprised that some cabinet members say that as i would probably be one of those given my similarities to the Lib Dem right however that to me does not make me think that they are going to jump. If that point does come then fair enough, but i do not see it coming.

    Only idiots expected Clegg ect.. to defect.

    I like Clegg but i would'nt go that far.
    Fair comment, but your young membership is really falling again - you had a big momentum after you rebranded under Cameron. But Cameron is wearing off he is not in fashion no more is not really for change and so young people don't like him and are leaving the Tories.

    We had one of your ex TSR members come defect and he is a market orientated chap he is very happy he switched feels more at ease with us lot from just the market perspective alone.

    The Conservatives prior to Cameron had a poor youth party and organisation. We are starting to see it fall back to pre-Cameron youth party levels. So the future for the Conservatives is worrying indeed after being out of touch on the pasty debacle, your parties in trouble more so dare I say than ours.

    We have short term issues we will overcome you have long term issues repeatedly rearing there head that threaten to rip your party in 3 as its stuck in different periods of history and time and has too many different generations. Every young Tory denies its social conservatism in its party, but its only so long its young members will tolerate it and ignore it. The coalition breakup will leave a lot of particularly young Conservatives asking themselves, who are we and why am I a Conservative and will find themselves worryingly struggling to answer it and have an identity crisis.

    After the coalition your party will swing rightwards and this will make loads of your MP's, Members and Voters uncomfortable who can not really be described as Conservatives but Coalitionists, then they will flee to us. The only thing grounding your party and sparring it from rightism is the Lib Dems and the coalition, the policies coming out are not Conservative but Lib Dem and once the coalition ends people will realise that as the Lib Dems will reflect more of what the government was and coalition was than the Conservative party in the post-breakup years.
    • 24 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by misterxninja)
    After the coalition your party will swing rightwards.
    I sincerely doubt it... and this is from me, probably the furthest to the right in the party
    • 12 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by paperclip)
    Continue? Students aren't entitled to free prescriptions. In the assessment, students loans get counted as 'income' (i know there's a separate section for it but it still gets counted towards that). So, if you get how much they say you need to survive on loan (£50 a week, IIRC?) then you're not entitled to free prescriptions.

    I know this because for the past 3 years i've had to buy a prescription prepayment certificate. It's a joke, what type of income do you have to repay?

    Moreover, they typically work this out over how long a student year is, which means that £50 goes significantly lower when you work out the extra costs when you have to provide for yourself during the extra time. Once i've paid my bills, and bought food, i barely have enough to live off; i really can't afford the extra £10ish a month for a PPC. In fact, there was an instance where i had to go without my medication for a month because of this.
    This is what I applied for and get: http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/moneytax...ed/dg_10018978, most students can get it but just never fill the form out. I want to roll this form out as it works, our opticians privatised service is brilliant I want our health service to reflect this model.

    You just extend this form system into a voucher system to mean the poor continue to get free healthcare but in a private system. This will cost the government less as once you have a competitive private system the cost of operations will drop and thus it will be cheaper for the same operation under the new privatised system over time than it would be under the NHS system that artificially keeps operation costs higher.
    • 9 followers
    Online

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by misterxninja)
    Fair comment, but your young membership is really falling again - you had a big momentum after you rebranded under Cameron. But Cameron is wearing off he is not in fashion no more is not really for change and so young people don't like him and are leaving the Tories.

    We had one of your ex TSR members come defect and he is a market orientated chap he is very happy he switched feels more at ease with us lot from just the market perspective alone.

    The Conservatives prior to Cameron had a poor youth party and organisation. We are starting to see it fall back to pre-Cameron youth party levels. So the future for the Conservatives is worrying indeed after being out of touch on the pasty debacle, your parties in trouble more so dare I say than ours.

    We have short term issues we will overcome you have long term issues repeatedly rearing there head that threaten to rip your party in 3 as its stuck in different periods of history and time and has too many different generations. Every young Tory denies its social conservatism in its party, but its only so long its young members will tolerate it and ignore it. The coalition breakup will leave a lot of particularly young Conservatives asking themselves, who are we and why am I a Conservative and will find themselves worryingly struggling to answer it and have an identity crisis.

    After the coalition your party will swing rightwards and this will make loads of your MP's, Members and Voters uncomfortable who can not really be described as Conservatives but Coalitionists, then they will flee to us. The only thing grounding your party and sparring it from rightism is the Lib Dems and the coalition, the policies coming out are not Conservative but Lib Dem and once the coalition ends people will realise that as the Lib Dems will reflect more of what the government was and coalition was than the Conservative party in the post-breakup years.
    One of the issues with that is is that the youth branch almost feel like one of the ingredients required to get into government, but considerably less necessary once in government. I know who you're meaning regarding the member who defected, if I'm remembering rightly. - But its prevalent in all parts of the country. I've had a mate of mine, he'd postrate himself at the mention of Lady T's name, but he's left the Tories, and not lurched to the left, but certainly disapproves totally of the way Osborne runs the economy for example.

    A lot of CF felt let down by the tripling of the tuition fees, but the mainstream Conservatives can do that, and not let it harm their prospects as they have a fuller base. The Lib Dems on the other hand relied on the student vote, and that is why it was so clearly political suicide to triple the fees. four grand, five grand they could, and probably would have been forgiven for, but nine grand reeked of and still reeks of simply government greed.
    • 12 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by tehFrance)
    I sincerely doubt it... and this is from me, probably the furthest to the right in the party
    Well we shall see in time then won't we. Though I do love these differing perspectives and pointing's to the future. It is just nice to share our love for politics our parties and our forecasts and rationales behind them and probe at outcomes. What do you think will happen then?
    • 12 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Matthew_Lowson)
    One of the issues with that is is that the youth branch almost feel like one of the ingredients required to get into government, but considerably less necessary once in government. I know who you're meaning regarding the member who defected, if I'm remembering rightly. - But its prevalent in all parts of the country. I've had a mate of mine, he'd postrate himself at the mention of Lady T's name, but he's left the Tories, and not lurched to the left, but certainly disapproves totally of the way Osborne runs the economy for example.

    A lot of CF felt let down by the tripling of the tuition fees, but the mainstream Conservatives can do that, and not let it harm their prospects as they have a fuller base. The Lib Dems on the other hand relied on the student vote, and that is why it was so clearly political suicide to triple the fees. four grand, five grand they could, and probably would have been forgiven for, but nine grand reeked of and still reeks of simply government greed.
    Current students don't care about the tuition fees they understand the situation and why what happened happened this is showing through in our canvass data. Its the middle aged generations who are annoyed on the pledge not the policy. Wrong again the Lib Dems never relied on a student vote, because they never had one it was a myth. Students never turn out to vote they are the most unreliable voting base out of all groups in society and thus no party would rely on students for its vote because it doesn't work and gets you nowhere - they simply forget.

    The CF were not upset about the trebling of fees... No one I know in the CF cared at all - weird where you get that one from. Most of them wanted no fee cap actually. These are people already at university unaffected, the new system policy is not even that bad most people pay back less overall proven.

    It is not political suicide your just basing everything on a missassumption, that students were Lib Dems and we relied on them they were neither - we still had the smaller societies at most universities even prior to Clegg. The Lib Dems have gone from being a backward mass membership party model to becoming a professional party this has been a transitory period for the Lib Dems, not its death but the beginning of its route to government. It never was a sensible option for vast heaps of the electorate and was a turn off as a no hope of power party. It has sacrificed short term for long term gain, anyone who studies British Political Parties know what the Lib Dems have done, much like the Labour party did with New Labour they professionalised and gave in and hired spin doctors and stopped using mass membership electoral models and adopted the pioneer Tory parties professional party model.

    This really is the beginning for the Lib Dems, not the end.

    Edit: The largest Lib Dem membership proportion is from the 65+ category and this category did not defect when we went into coalition and contrary welcomed going into government. It was the small minority statistic of 18-25 young social democratic membership who had only been members since Charles Kennedy who left us, they were not part of what I would call our 'base'. Most people know nothing about the Lib Dems who we are, what we are made up of, what model we use electorally etc. Because they spend too much time with there heads in newspapers rather than textbook analysis.
    • 17 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by misterxninja)
    This is what I applied for and get: http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/moneytax...ed/dg_10018978, most students can get it but just never fill the form out. I want to roll this form out as it works, our opticians privatised service is brilliant I want our health service to reflect this model.

    You just extend this form system into a voucher system to mean the poor continue to get free healthcare but in a private system. This will cost the government less as once you have a competitive private system the cost of operations will drop and thus it will be cheaper for the same operation under the new privatised system over time than it would be under the NHS system that artificially keeps operation costs higher.
    I know what the HC1 form is. I don't have a job, so i live off my student loan, yet they rejected me (i did get a HC3 - limited help with health costs, but this doesn't cover prescriptions anyway). This is one illustration of how it doesn't work. If you rolled this out nationally, then i'd be in an even worse situation; probably not being treated for my medical conditions.

    Also, you seem to forget that the NHS reaches great economies of scale; indeed, a system that covers everyone costs our state 7% of our GDP, whilst a system that doesn't cover everyone costs America 14% of their GDP. Further, don't be so quick to forget the terrible reputation the American system has; if reports of patients being thrown out of A&E, into a cab and ditched by the side of the street are commonplace then there is something wrong with your hospital.
    • 39 followers
    Online

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by misterxninja)
    Fair comment, but your young membership is really falling again - you had a big momentum after you rebranded under Cameron. But Cameron is wearing off he is not in fashion no more is not really for change and so young people don't like him and are leaving the Tories.

    We had one of your ex TSR members come defect and he is a market orientated chap he is very happy he switched feels more at ease with us lot from just the market perspective alone.

    The Conservatives prior to Cameron had a poor youth party and organisation. We are starting to see it fall back to pre-Cameron youth party levels. So the future for the Conservatives is worrying indeed after being out of touch on the pasty debacle, your parties in trouble more so dare I say than ours.

    We have short term issues we will overcome you have long term issues repeatedly rearing there head that threaten to rip your party in 3 as its stuck in different periods of history and time and has too many different generations. Every young Tory denies its social conservatism in its party, but its only so long its young members will tolerate it and ignore it. The coalition breakup will leave a lot of particularly young Conservatives asking themselves, who are we and why am I a Conservative and will find themselves worryingly struggling to answer it and have an identity crisis.

    After the coalition your party will swing rightwards and this will make loads of your MP's, Members and Voters uncomfortable who can not really be described as Conservatives but Coalitionists, then they will flee to us. The only thing grounding your party and sparring it from rightism is the Lib Dems and the coalition, the policies coming out are not Conservative but Lib Dem and once the coalition ends people will realise that as the Lib Dems will reflect more of what the government was and coalition was than the Conservative party in the post-breakup years.
    Indeed, but i still do not think that we are in worse shape than you guys in the short term (possibly long term) or Labour simply by virtue of our differences being social rather than economic.

    The pasty debacle (or granny tax) really are not major or election winners in 2015, with that being said the PR team needs sacking because communication has being shambolic.

    I do think that you are correct on the generational issue.

    You final paragraph is interesting, but i will reserve judgement.

    (Original post by Matthew_Lowson)
    One of the issues with that is is that the youth branch almost feel like one of the ingredients required to get into government, but considerably less necessary once in government. I know who you're meaning regarding the member who defected, if I'm remembering rightly. - But its prevalent in all parts of the country. I've had a mate of mine, he'd postrate himself at the mention of Lady T's name, but he's left the Tories, and not lurched to the left, but certainly disapproves totally of the way Osborne runs the economy for example.

    A lot of CF felt let down by the tripling of the tuition fees, but the mainstream Conservatives can do that, and not let it harm their prospects as they have a fuller base. The Lib Dems on the other hand relied on the student vote, and that is why it was so clearly political suicide to triple the fees. four grand, five grand they could, and probably would have been forgiven for, but nine grand reeked of and still reeks of simply government greed.
    I think the problem here is that if politicians really want to win elections and engage the public then they need to involve their young members (which they do) but also shift the party towards their views (which they do not) because very few CF members will really want to vote for the traditional social conservatives of which there are still too many in the House.
    • 12 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by paperclip)
    I know what the HC1 form is. I don't have a job, so i live off my student loan, yet they rejected me (i did get a HC3 - limited help with health costs, but this doesn't cover prescriptions anyway). This is one illustration of how it doesn't work. If you rolled this out nationally, then i'd be in an even worse situation; probably not being treated for my medical conditions.

    Also, you seem to forget that the NHS reaches great economies of scale; indeed, a system that covers everyone costs our state 7% of our GDP, whilst a system that doesn't cover everyone costs America 14% of their GDP. Further, don't be so quick to forget the terrible reputation the American system has; if reports of patients being thrown out of A&E, into a cab and ditched by the side of the street are commonplace then there is something wrong with your hospital.
    You roll it out and automatically make full time students covered and part time students partially covered. Simple solution, since there dependent and not contributors at that stage in there life. That is what I said previously. I filled it out I get the full benefit... I don't have a job and I live off my student loan and maintenance grant. If you get maintenance you get HC2.
    • 17 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by misterxninja)
    You roll it out and automatically make full time students covered and part time students partially covered. Simple solution, since there dependent and not contributors at that stage in there life. That is what I said previously. I filled it out I get the full benefit... I don't have a job and I live off my student loan and maintenance grant. If you get maintenance you get HC2.
    That's fine from a theoretical point of view, however, the situation i'm in demonstrates that means testing doesn't always work. There will be some people that slip through the net, and healthcare is something that we cannot compromise about. Moreover, even if this doesn't happen, as previously discussed, healthcare in America is a shambles, why replicate a system that doesn't work? Forgive me if i'm wrong, but doesn't the profit motive encourage cost cutting behaviour? Recall a couple of years back, when a whistleblower revealed the unethical practice of parkfields care home. Now, as far as i'm aware, care homes are not generally state funded; but the profit motive encouraged cost cutting behaviour that lead to residents health being put at risk. Similar reports exist from other privatised firms; notably a large supermarket was accused of selling meat way out of date, and mixing pre cooked meat (it was accidentally warmed up) with raw meat - a big no no for cross contamination. There are a vast amount of reasons not to trust private firms, and keeping peoples' needs above that of the profit; especially in something like the NHS, which provides massive economies of scale (as illustrated earlier) demonstrates the need for a nationalised health service. I cannot understand how you can be wanting to spend more money on a system that is worse.

    Just to predict your response, you're gonna suggest regulation to be the answer. But why add another level of bureaucracy to something that, generally speaking (in comparison to other systems worldwide) works pretty damn well. Moreover, regulation doesn't always work; the food industry is regulated, but remember the reports when they found out food in Ramsey's restaurant was microwaved? Regulation only works when it's too late.

    Although i guess this is just another area the Lib Dems are out of touch with the public, because lets face it, noone beyond a few free market extremists wants privatised healthcare. Hell, most of the profession is against the current reforms; it's a sad state to see democracy in this way, this is not what representative democracy is about. Thankfully, i can see the health and social care bill being the Conservatives downfall; wasn't it something like 250 GPs that pledged to stand against them in the next election because of this? (Sorry, blurring the line between TSR and RL politics now)
    • 12 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by paperclip)
    That's fine from a theoretical point of view, however, the situation i'm in demonstrates that means testing doesn't always work. There will be some people that slip through the net, and healthcare is something that we cannot compromise about. Moreover, even if this doesn't happen, as previously discussed, healthcare in America is a shambles, why replicate a system that doesn't work? Forgive me if i'm wrong, but doesn't the profit motive encourage cost cutting behaviour? Recall a couple of years back, when a whistleblower revealed the unethical practice of parkfields care home. Now, as far as i'm aware, care homes are not generally state funded; but the profit motive encouraged cost cutting behaviour that lead to residents health being put at risk. Similar reports exist from other privatised firms; notably a large supermarket was accused of selling meat way out of date, and mixing pre cooked meat (it was accidentally warmed up) with raw meat - a big no no for cross contamination. There are a vast amount of reasons not to trust private firms, and keeping peoples' needs above that of the profit; especially in something like the NHS, which provides massive economies of scale (as illustrated earlier) demonstrates the need for a nationalised health service. I cannot understand how you can be wanting to spend more money on a system that is worse.

    Just to predict your response, you're gonna suggest regulation to be the answer. But why add another level of bureaucracy to something that, generally speaking (in comparison to other systems worldwide) works pretty damn well. Moreover, regulation doesn't always work; the food industry is regulated, but remember the reports when they found out food in Ramsey's restaurant was microwaved? Regulation only works when it's too late.

    Although i guess this is just another area the Lib Dems are out of touch with the public, because lets face it, noone beyond a few free market extremists wants privatised healthcare. Hell, most of the profession is against the current reforms; it's a sad state to see democracy in this way, this is not what representative democracy is about. Thankfully, i can see the health and social care bill being the Conservatives downfall; wasn't it something like 250 GPs that pledged to stand against them in the next election because of this? (Sorry, blurring the line between TSR and RL politics now)
    It works better private, the USA is not the UK our citizens are better off than US citizens. Our poor are much much much better off than there poor, totally different country in size and scope. The reason it don't work in the USA is the refusal to implement and protect the poor in a private system as it gets called 'socialist' its the right wing's fault healthcare don't work there.

    The profession is naturally against the reforms because they have artificially propped up pay packets and jobs that would not exist in a private system, its merely self interest. Those in the NHS are used to a culture of we will give you whatever money you need and find it from somewhere all the time, they oppose all change the NHS from within they love it how it is as from their perspective its all cushty from the inside, but not the outside.

    The private system will save us money and lead to a tax break the individual will win here, those who are healthy will save so much from a private health system. The quality and delivery of services will go up. Slag the USA all you want off but we have to send so many of our patients there because we are not equipped to provide the specialism in the UK they have there. If we had a full private system we would not need this. Fertility treatment we have the knowledge of in the UK is not provided on the NHS because it costs too much, under a private system a new market will be made and it will become self sufficient once we sell off the NHS and give it a big start up boost it will do the rest - we will see the GIFT baby fertility treatment people go to the USA for rolled out in the UK.

    I must remind you this is a Lib Dem thread and I'm the only Lib Dem I know on TSR and in my involvement in Liberal Youth who thinks we should privatise the NHS. So really is no point having this unrepresentative argument, perhaps go start up on the Tory wing thread who still want to privatise it and I will go there and continue this debate.

    If you want to debate with our health policy Birchington has outlined what our TSR health policy is roughly here pages back and is working on health associated bills, so he is best to direct your arguments on the matter to. If you want to challenge the privatisation of the NHS do it with a party who officially endorses this idea on there thread because ours unfortunately do not, so this is all pointless and irrelevant to this thread.
    • 35 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Moleman1996)
    Could the Lib Dems reveal what they would seek to do about cutting top heavy management in the NHS?
    I suggest through NHS office jockeys (especially managers) into a ring and make them fight to death using things lke rubbers, pencils, staplers and plastic pencil cases.


    (Original post by Birchington)
    I believe it's essential that the structure of the NHS organisation is reformed from extremely top-heavy to a more localised, patient friendly 'bottom up' approach. I think it's important that the powers of budget setting are placed back in the hands of clinicians and GPs rather than the layer of costly, unaccountable bureaucracy that exists within the NHS.

    I would also like to see a return to the 'matron' system in wards - essentially putting nurses back in charge of each ward instead of managers. This should hopefully return the focus of nurses away from meeting needless targets and back to focusing fully on providing excellent patient care.

    I've got many more ideas on the NHS here, ideas which the TSR Lib Dems will hopefully seek to implement.
    Ooooooh Matron, what a carry on.
    • 32 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    For the past few days I have been in hiding, only responding to PMs. Today I return to full duties as Leader.
    During my time in hiding I started work on my Manifesto for MUN. I have also started to look at other Upper Chambers. I also watched a couple of :007: movies, The Spy Who Loved Me and For Your Eyes Only

    I'M BACK
    • 49 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Morgsie)
    For the past few days I have been in hiding, only responding to PMs. Today I return to full duties as Leader.
    During my time in hiding I started work on my Manifesto for MUN. I have also started to look at other Upper Chambers. I also watched a couple of :007: movies, The Spy Who Loved Me and For Your Eyes Only

    I'M BACK
    Welcome back!
    • 32 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by toronto353)
    Welcome back!
    Thanks, its good to be back.

    I am halfway through my MUN Manifesto.
Updated: March 11, 2013
New on TSR

GCSE mocks revision

Talk study tips this weekend

Article updates
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.