The problem with cutbacks in any service is that it does more damage to the infrastructure than first calculated.
When you cut back on staffing levels anyone with commercial experience - and politicians these days are so wet behind the eyes as they come direct from university to be employed as 'lobbyists' to be then short listed as a Member of Parliament - knows that any person of 'quality' before redundancies come find jobs elsewhere, before the axe falls.
This leaves the rubbish who are either just 'no good' or 'unemployable' in a quality organisation.
So now that the 'administration' is being replaced by local GP's (who are usually those doctors who failed the grade to become consultants and took second place in the community) who are expected to balance budgets and appoint priorities.
So the GP's will get the 'dregs' from what is left of the current NHS administration officers (after we have paid them redundancy money) to administer the future of the NHS - an absolute complete mess that will cost more and result in more deaths and longer waiting lists.
Cheapest results in poor quality - if you life was at stake do you use a Major Hospital or the skilled old guy who does the job cheaper in his back-room?
No.6
Why and who in their right minds thinks GP run services are going to be the answer to what is a growing problem. In the NHS we have spent years prolonging life , but not necessarily the quality of life. The demands of pts needs are not going to met any better by GPs unless they have an open cheque. Its time to take the rosie colored specs off and see whats going on. How about starting a book on how long the nhs will last!! Ill put a weeks wages ( as a nurse , not alot) on 5 years !! maximium !
ReplyDelete