Hospital beds under the tories

They've saved tax payers money and given it to their paymasters and sponsors in return for influence, and a seat on the board when they're turfed out of their constituencies.

I can think of a plethora of medieval methods of justice for each and every one of them.
 
1672956942856.png

20k fall from 2009 to 2010, start of austerity?
the drop since then has been a relatively consistent 2.5k a year.
 
It looks even worse if you compae per capita. Way below every large economy in the world and by a long way. 37th in the world, 6th richest economy.

Of course it is important to remember you cant's take hospital bedds in isolation. You may have a great preventative healthcare system and not need so many beds. Not sure thats us though.

en.wikipedia.org

List of countries by hospital beds - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org
 
tbh that graph shows a more drastic drop under Blair/Brown who just carried on what Thatcher/Major started. Blair/Brown also escalated PFI schemes to replace/build/refurb hospitals with fewer beds and the private sector is still bleeding the NHS of money out of them.

NHS hospital trusts will have to spend £billions in payments by the time the last contract ends in 2050.. An initial £13bn of private sector-funded investment in new hospitals will end up costing the NHS in England £80bn by the time all contracts come to an end. That's where the money's going, some trusts are paying a sixth of their income in repaying debts to the private sector from PFI schemes
 
kuepper said:
tbh that graph shows a more drastic drop under Blair/Brown who just carried on what Thatcher/Major started. Blair/Brown also escalated PFI schemes to replace/build/refurb hospitals with fewer beds and the private sector is still bleeding the NHS of money out of them.

NHS hospital trusts will have to spend £billions in payments by the time the last contract ends in 2050.. An initial £13bn of private sector-funded investment in new hospitals will end up costing the NHS in England £80bn by the time all contracts come to an end. That's where the money's going, some trusts are paying a sixth of their income in repaying debts to the private sector from PFI schemes
Click to expand...
This is what I was going to say. All the new builds that Labour got going have been completed during the Tories reign. The PFI contracts being so expensive meant savings had to be made elsewhere. The idea was that new hospitals would be more efficient. In some situations they are but in others they are much less efficient (single bed instead of multi bed wards etc are better for the patient but take longer for staff to get round).

The standard of the buildings are far higher and they definitely needed updating but the state should have taken on the costs instead of the hospitals to allow them to afford more staff.

Some of it is also perfectly valid. Hospitals are the most expensive setting to care for people and lots of people were staying way longer than was medically necessary. There are better outcomes having people in their own homes being independent (and reduced risk of a hospital acquired infection). It makes sense to provide that care where it is cheaper to do so but the Tories missed out the bit where they should have increased the social care to offset the hospital beds.
 
Nano said:
This is what I was going to say. All the new builds that Labour got going have been completed during the Tories reign. The PFI contracts being so expensive meant savings had to be made elsewhere. The idea was that new hospitals would be more efficient. In some situations they are but in others they are much less efficient (single bed instead of multi bed wards etc are better for the patient but take longer for staff to get round).

The standard of the buildings are far higher and they definitely needed updating but the state should have taken on the costs instead of the hospitals to allow them to afford more staff.

Some of it is also perfectly valid. Hospitals are the most expensive setting to care for people and lots of people were staying way longer than was medically necessary. There are better outcomes having people in their own homes being independent (and reduced risk of a hospital acquired infection). It makes sense to provide that care where it is cheaper to do so but the Tories missed out the bit where they should have increased the social care to offset the hospital beds.
Click to expand...
I did read from a consultant on twitter that between 25% and 45% of beds are taken by people who would be much better off being cared for at home, but the service isn't available. I know this isn't new, but it is a staggering percentage at a time when the NHS is struggling for beds.

The answer, as we were bickering about yesterday Nano, is resources, staff primarily, doctors, nurses and in the community care put in place to discharge folks.

Phil Moorehouse posted a graph a couple of days ago showing the investment in the NHS against GDP. Under the tories it gets lower and lower, and eventually the lowest in the world, then under labour it builds back up again. Then the tories, then labour. It doesn't work, not sure what would. Is PR an answer to this problem? Maybe.
 
Laughing said:
I did read from a consultant on twitter that between 25% and 45% of beds are taken by people who would be much better off being cared for at home, but the service isn't available. I know this isn't new, but it is a staggering percentage at a time when the NHS is struggling for beds.

The answer, as we were bickering about yesterday Nano, is resources, staff primarily, doctors, nurses and in the community care put in place to discharge folks.

Phil Moorehouse posted a graph a couple of days ago showing the investment in the NHS against GDP. Under the tories it gets lower and lower, and eventually the lowest in the world, then under labour it builds back up again. Then the tories, then labour. It doesn't work, not sure what would. Is PR an answer to this problem? Maybe.
Click to expand...
Bed blocking has always been an issue but a relatively small issue. Now it is massive.

The big problem with that graph (without seeing it) is that it is only a small part of the system. The Tories have funded the NHS but they have cut social care so total Health and Social care spending hasn't kept up. I presume it also ignores the fact that our population has been growing significantly so our spending per capita hasn't increased as much as required and then on top of that we have an ageing population which require more healthcare spending.

Resources within a hospital is a massive issue because as you say it takes time to train people but the biggest issue is outside of hospital. Better social care, lower deprivation etc can all be improved instantly with the missing funding from the past decade. We don't have to sit and wait until new saff are trained. WE have to do better at reducing demand for trained helathcare requirements and retaining staff by making their conditions and pay good instead of dreadful.
 
Nano said:
Bed blocking has always been an issue but a relatively small issue. Now it is massive.

The big problem with that graph (without seeing it) is that it is only a small part of the system. The Tories have funded the NHS but they have cut social care so total Health and Social care spending hasn't kept up. I presume it also ignores the fact that our population has been growing significantly so our spending per capita hasn't increased as much as required and then on top of that we have an ageing population which require more healthcare spending.

Resources within a hospital is a massive issue because as you say it takes time to train people but the biggest issue is outside of hospital. Better social care, lower deprivation etc can all be improved instantly with the missing funding from the past decade. We don't have to sit and wait until new saff are trained. WE have to do better at reducing demand for trained helathcare requirements and retaining staff by making their conditions and pay good instead of dreadful.
Click to expand...
Let me see if I can find the graph. As with all public services, it paints a clear picture of tory v labour ideology. Gimme a minute or two
 
Had to recreate the graph as I couldn't find it. What is apparent from the graph is that France and Germany's spend as a % of GDP has increased as populations age and increase.
The second thing that is obvious is that labour increased the spend and to a much higher degree than France and Germany. What you cant see is prior to 1999. The tories had run the NHS down by spending the least, against GDP in the whole of europe so Blair had to increase spending year on year to repair the damage. The tool I used only went back as far as 2000, unfortunately.
The next thing that is patently obvious is since 2010 the spend on the NHS has flattened out, when it should be rising as our population has increased.

You can compare different countries here https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SH.XPD.CHEX.GD.ZS?locations=GB-FR-DE Just add country codes in BE, JP, etc, or click them in the table below the graph.

It is demonstrably the case that tories reduce spend on services and labour increase it. Despite the tory mantra of spending more than ever before on the NHS, which is true as far as it goes, but no where near enough required to just stand still.

1673006113356.png
 
Stocko said:
Yet, in this timescale the NHS budget has gone from 105 Billion to 180 Billion
wheres the money going?
Click to expand...

www.opendemocracy.net

Tory links of health agencies exposed as Hunt lines up next NHS sell-off in England

Whilst understaffed wards and surgeries turn to well-connected private sector agencies to fill the gaps created by Cameron's health 'reforms', the NHS's own in-house recruitment agency is to be sold off, it has emerged.
www.opendemocracy.net www.opendemocracy.net

Last year, Jeremy Hunt spent £1.4bn on NHS redundancies - then spent £3.9 billion filling the gaps with temporary agency staff in the NHS – tripling costs in just 3 years.

7,000 frontline clinical staff have been axed since 2010, the Department of Health has admitted.

Understaffed wards turn to private firms that supply agency nurses and doctors. These firms have pocketed millions in profits over the past year – charging up to £1,000 per shift.
 
The thing that stood out in that letter was not so much the disengenous nature of the email, but that it read like it was written by my 11 year old daughter.
 
Laughing said:
The thing that stood out in that letter was not so much the disengenous nature of the email, but that it read like it was written by my 11 year old daughter.
Click to expand...

When she has been naughty but blaming someone else?
 
Piccadilly Day Tripper said:
www.opendemocracy.net

Tory links of health agencies exposed as Hunt lines up next NHS sell-off in England

Whilst understaffed wards and surgeries turn to well-connected private sector agencies to fill the gaps created by Cameron's health 'reforms', the NHS's own in-house recruitment agency is to be sold off, it has emerged.
www.opendemocracy.net www.opendemocracy.net

Last year, Jeremy Hunt spent £1.4bn on NHS redundancies - then spent £3.9 billion filling the gaps with temporary agency staff in the NHS – tripling costs in just 3 years.

7,000 frontline clinical staff have been axed since 2010, the Department of Health has admitted.

Understaffed wards turn to private firms that supply agency nurses and doctors. These firms have pocketed millions in profits over the past year – charging up to £1,000 per shift.
Click to expand...
(y)
Giving profits to private pockets whilst poorly people and their care, are put in danger by huge qualified staff shortages.
Not helped by abolishing the bursary system and making it difficult for qualified European and non-European Nationals to work in the NHS.
:mad:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top