Bye Bye Jacqui – no more freebies paid for by the taxpayer

Check this out

http://www.wekip.org/

Ms Smith had two problems.

Firstly, having come through the ranks as a typical party apparat chick she found herself a starring role way beyond that which was warranted by her intelligence, talent or ability. Not a great advert for positive discrimination.

Secondly, like many people who are granted power beyond their merit, she found pleasure in exercising that power for its own sake. Her instincts were naturally authoritarian and her actions were motivated by a fundamental insecurity based on a justifiable lack of self-confidence in her ability to do the job.

Unless they are repealed, her new laws and policy initiatives will continue to haunt us long after she herself has been deservedly forgotten.

I thought Sky had the exclusive.

Hopefully the incoming Home Secutary won’t be quite so hellbent on introducing ID cards.

Oh, what a shame! NOT!

Her instincts were naturally authoritarian and her actions were motivated by a fundamental insecurity based on a justifiable lack of self-confidence in her ability to do the job.

Well, pretty much everyone who comes into the Home Office ends up that way.

The biggest con will be for the people who think the Tories will end up taking power and prove to be less authoritarian than Labour.

Update: Tom Watson’s resigned from his post as Cabinet Office minister.

“The biggest con will be for the people who think the Tories will end up taking power and prove to be less authoritarian than Labour.”

They could hardly be more authoritarian, could they?

The same Tom Watson who, when accused of helping plot the Brown coup – that worked out so well – claimed he would not take a government post under Brown? That one?

Never could the phrase “rat deserting a sinking ship” be more aptly employed.

Farewell, you fat, sleazy f***.

PS – apologies for the swearing, but if he chooses to sue (cue Sunny – do it! do it! do it!) my defence will be “fair comment”.

And no jury in the land would convict!

The biggest con will be for the people who think the Tories will end up taking power and prove to be less authoritarian than Labour.

I still don’t think that the British voter realises what it is going to be like under a Tory government.

They are relying on “Well – it can’t be any worse now, can it?”

#2

“Not a great advert for positive discrimination.”

Funny that every time a man fails, he’s just a failure. Every time a woman fails, people say she only got the job because of “positive discrimination”.

It is possible for someone to get a job on merit, then end up a failure anyway (whether you think Jacqui Smith did or not).

Will:

I still don’t think that the British voter realises what it is going to be like under a Tory government.

They are relying on “Well – it can’t be any worse now, can it?”

Or – they know damn well it’ll be worse; they’ve just set their expectations low enough accordingly – though it’ll probably be even worse than that.

PS: The Guardian says that Watson’s paper was in yesterday’s Birmingham Post – strike one against the London-centric media?

[11] I still don’t think that the British voter realises what it is going to be like under a Tory government.

Well there are going to be health cuts, they have already admitted that much.
http://www.healthpolicyinsight.com/?q=node/284

Even so, all the Tories have to do now is sit back, put their hands behind their heads and join everybody else watching NuLab unravel faster than a thread of wool caught on a barbed wire fence.

Who’s in the running to replace her then?

13 – Agreed.

14 – A&E, there will be more cuts than people realise. I can see one of the first casualties (forgive the pun) will be the minimum wage – they, the Tories, will argue that they need to rid the UK of it to be competative in the world again.

14/16 – Darling’s last (in both senses of the word) budget contained implied cuts according to the IFS of (I recall) 2.5% pa from 2010/11 through 2013/14.

Whoever gets in – there will be cuts.
There have to be cuts.

Who’s in the running to replace her then?

It’d better not be Blunkett or Clarke.

Liam Byrne?
Jim Murphy?
Vera Baird?
Phil Woolas?

Note: In no way is the above an order of preference. Or any preference at all.

Fair point, cjcjc – perhaps it’s unfair to criticize Cameron for being explicit about health cuts because which ever party which succeeds NuLab (oh, OK the tories) will have to make SOME cuts.

Mind you the tories have a rubbish record on health and Lansley is already coming up with daft ideas about increasing the size of a GP’s patch – do any of these people live in the real world?
http://www.healthcarerepublic.com/rss/news/article/909572/Tories-abolish-practice-boundaries/

cjcjc – the problem isn’t cuts, it’s the sheer relish with which I suspect the Tories (and their supporters) will go about making them.

A&E – you did spot that was a spoof memo by Alan Maynard didn’t you?

Brown’s last budget wrote in 7% cuts in public sector budgets over the 3-year planning horizon but didn’t have the decency to be clear about it (see IFS analysis)

The one thing the conservatives have said is that they would ring-fence health, which implies a 10% cut on everything else if you stick to Brown’s spending plans.

With great chutzpah Ed Balls then used this as the basis for a “Tory cuts” line, when the cut is the one Labour planned in its budget.

As for practice boundaries, can you explain why denying lots of working people easy access to a GP is a good idea. Why can’t I have a GP in London where I am when GPs are open, instead of a GP where I live, whom I have to taking a 1/2 day off to see.

replacement; I think all eyes on Woolas

@8: They [the Tories] could hardly be more authoritarian [than Labour], could they?

In 1997, when Labour won, I thought they might not be perfect, but at least they won’t be as bad as the Tories. And I was right, they weren’t as bad as the Tories. They were worse.

If Cameron wins the general election (which seems likely unless Labour get sensible and introduce PR), a lot of people will be saying, “the Tories aren’t perfect, but at least they’re not as bad as Labour”.

And I’ve a feeling they’ll be proved right, in the same way I was. Cameron comes across (to me, at least) as a glib liar with no real convictions of his own except a desire for power. I trust him not one bit.

Do we have a government left?

There really should be a general election. I’m bored of all this, and so are the people of the UK.

I meant to say, there really should be a general election NOW – i.e. not in a year’s time from now. Brown is scum, Labour are finished – let’s have the bastard Tories, sooner they get in the sooner they’ll get out.

[21] Spoof or not the Tory mantra is for growth predicted on the back of tax cuts and reduction in expenditure on public services – I don’t think there is much dispute about these intentions, and I would be very surprised if health was treated any differently.
Imagine someone like Daniel Hannan let loose on the health service?

As to the GP question, well if you are fit enough to go to work then it sounds unlikely that you need to see a GP urgently (and if there was an emergency then go to A&E). Convenience medicine (in other words pandering to the worried well) comes at a very high price, and detracts from those with more serious health problems (cancer, multiple sclerosis, etc).
The GP system might be slightly more effective if so many people didn’t take the piss.

On a related point, to round off a terrible day for Labour, I have to say I found the Labour election broadcast this evening embarrasing. Totally and utterly.

Gordon should have done what Cameron did the other day and give a State of the Nation type address. Without grinning. Explain himself to the country, sound like he understands what the public are feeling, that he “gets it”, that he’ll punish errant MPs.

He should also subject himself to a phone-in on 5Live, as Cameron, Clegg and all the other party leaders have done.

Watching PMQs tomorrow will be like watching a slow motion car crash; someone needs to put Gordon out of his misery…

asquith: “Who’s in the running to replace her then?”

Phil Woolas is the next former NUS President in line as Home Secretary, to follow on from Jack Straw and Charles Clarke. Unless Trevor Phillips or David Aaronovitch is given a peerage.

As Sunny notes, there is something terribly corrosive about the job of Home Secretary. When appointed, Charles Clarke was perceived as a decent managerialist, but in office, he turned into an authoritarian. To his credit, he appears embarrassed about it, but his personal failure confirms that there is something wrong with the Home Office. While we campaign for parliamentary reform, reform of that government department demands special attention.

The last civilised Home Secretary was Douglas Hurd 20 years ago, and the last progressive was Roy Jenkins, 33 years ago. So in the last 33 years, authoritarian Home Secretaries have held the office for 29 years. Even if it isn’t Woolas, my bet is that the appointment will be someone equally inappropriate.

Sarah Ismail: “Do we have a government left?”

Yes, we have government in that there is a central body that directs the central bank, law enforcement bodies and the armed forces, with varying degrees of efficacy. The same body also collects taxes that provide for roads and education and income benefits. Government is still in control of core activities, otherwise the loony libertarians would be celebrating that the UK was a free state, just like Somalia.

We don’t have a government that can make significant changes. That is not a result of the MPs’ allowances scandal; New Labour was an unambitious project, unreviewed when given stomping parliamentary majorities, and it has simply fizzled out.

loony libertarians would be celebrating that the UK was a free state, just like Somalia.

LMFAO!

@30

What, the Douglas Hurd who oversaw the introduction of Section 28?

Acknowledged, Ken, but he didn’t motivate Section 28 and was beyond his control. In other ways, he was decent, particularly regarding prisoner rehabilitation.

pagar:
Her instincts were naturally authoritarian

She’d hardly have been made Home Secretary if she wasn’t an authoritarian. It’s been a prerequisite for the job since 1983.

John Meredith:
They could hardly be more authoritarian, could they?

Of course they will. The only thing that restrained them from being quite this authoritarian under Thatcher and Major, or even more so, was a Labour Opposition ardently sticking to a libertarian line. As with, for instance, the creeping privatisation in health and education, New Labour has only been able to get away with it because there was no Labour Opposition to seriously oppose it. It took a long time for the Tories to shift direction against authoritarian civil policies and and they have never put their full hearts into opposing authoritarian legislation (even ID cards – and why would they, why would they fight tooth and nail against legislation that used to the stuff of their dreams?).

What we will end up with is a Tory government that won’t hesitate to revert to type at the first opportunity, to use the first terrorist attack or upturn in crime figures as an excuse to drop libertarian positions that it has adopted purely for the sake of opposing the government; and a Labour Opposition that will (at least until its second defeat) be sticking to a Blairite line and reject any proposed return to libertarian civil policies as dimly as it views any proposed return to socialist economic ones, and so won’t be doing any serious opposing. We’re going to be completely screwed until at least 2014 (when, following that second defeat, Labour will hopefully start shifting back towards its traditional platform).

@27: I meant to say, there really should be a general election NOW

No, we need a democratic voting system first, i.e. PR.

2. pagar. Good comment as it equally applies to most politicians. The problem is that most politicians entered this career at university , if not before and have never aquired much experience before becoming an MP. In particular, most MPs have never exercised any power and once they aquire it ,they become drunk .

Wednesday update: Blears has resigned. Repeat: Blears has resigned.

Crikey, now it looks like a coup (although I suspect that Blears knew she was going to get the boot)… still, it’s a good thing for the government to have her well out of it…

A&E – this is kind of getting off topic, but you do I think display the classic passive aggressive moaning of the true NHS.

Consider the working type-2 diabetic, needing regular checkups, prescription renewals and likely to suffer various co-morbidities.

Currently rules say that she (my step-mother as it happens) cannot belong to the GP practice convenient for her, but one determined by the postcode she lives in.

If I could use one where I work, I would not always be demanding the first appointment slot of the day, but could be flexible throughout the day.

But no, we patients should be damned grateful, apparently, that you and your ilk deign to serve as at all. And stack up problems for yourselves along the way.

@28/41

you’re not suggesting that people abuse a service they perceive as “free”, are you?

heaven forfend!

[14][21] Even allowing for it being a spoof, I think the public sector pay cut (probably delivered as a three-year freeze on pay) and the extra taxation of public sector pensions (which equates to scrapping one year’s inflation uprating) are probably done deals if the Tories get in. And maybe whoever gets in.

And now Blears has gone… Brown is dead meat surely.

Yes, the departure of someone as popular and respected as the woman who came last in the deputy leadership election, is hugely damaging to Brown.

Ha!

@28

The GP system might be slightly more effective if so many people didn’t take the piss.

But it has been designed so that people will take the piss. Anything that is free, like the GP service, is not properly valued. There is no opportunity cost to not having it.

So the bored OAP faced with the choice of buying some cream for their piles or going to the GP where they can have a pleasant chat with a nice young man and get the ointment FOC is clearly going to take the latter course.

Why wouldn’t they?

And the GPs?

If someone is willing to pay them in excess of £100 a year to listen to stupid people talking a load of drivel and for prescribing occasional doses of antibiotics, why wouldn’t they?

The answer would be to have a basic flat rate charge of say £10 for a GP appointment. The waiting rooms would empty in an instant and we could save half of the current cost.

[41] – well I hope the other commentators won’t mind because this is straying away from other important news that has emerged today (resignation of Blears) but here goes.

First of all it it is impossible for me to comment on your situation because I do not know all of the circumstances – I was talking about general principles.

Also because I work for the NHS it does not mean that my family are not health consumers in exactly the way that your step-mother is.
As it happens my Dad was a type II who died (not that long ago) after suffering end organ failure associated with his diabetes (heart/kidneys) – so I do have some insight into the flip side of the coin from both a primary and secondary care perspective.

Monitoring of diabetes should involve hospital specialists (such as an opthalmologist to check the progression of retinopathy, etc) as well as a GP – so would you advocate that the location of hospitals should have to be more convenient as well?
But let’s say GP boundaries ARE extended – how far beyond the current 3 miles should we go?
If a patient cannot make it to the surgery and wishes to call out the GP round trips might end up at 10 or 15 miles (if Lansley’s daft proposals are implemented) – how many other patients will be disadvantaged by such arrangements because consultations are obviously going to take much longer (since the GP will be spending a great deal of his time on the road listening to radio 4 or perhaps Handel’s Messiah?).

Alternatives (to GPs) do exist for workers – for example it is estimated that around 2.5 million consultations take place in Walk-in- Centres (which deal with minor injuries or illnesses). NHS-direct also fields millions of calls, and can often provide sensible advice on self management of a whole host of self limiting conditions. A&E’s now see 19 million patients annually (I think that’s a third of the population by the way)

You conclude with an accusation – “but no, we patients should be damned grateful, apparently, that you and your ilk deign to serve as at all. And stack up problems for yourselves along the way”.
Obviously I cannot alter your perception of the motives of NHS staff but I can tell you that many of us feel frustrated that the consumerist mindset is very damaging to other patients – patients that may be less vocal because they are old and frail or very ill.

Or put another way I suspect there will ALWAYS be a percentage of people who are never satisfied if services provided by GPs, walk-in-centres, NHS direct, and A&E are still not enough for them – curiously the number of patients using these services is increasing year on year, now why is that I wonder, it’s not because we getting sicker that’s for sure?

[46]

Anything that is free, like the GP service, is not properly valued. There is no opportunity cost to not having it

Things that are free – in the sense of having no opportunity cost – include love, friendship and the beauties of nature.

I take it you don’t value them, either, Pagar.

Love, friendship and nature are insufficiently valued by most people.

Thank God the state does not yet see providing them as part of it’s role.

[49] The market-place can’t provide them, either.

You are correct.

But the point is they cost nothing.

Unlike GPs.