AND HERE WE GO - THE 2019 GENERAL ELECTION THREAD

[patricks148]

Certainly looks like boris lied again yesterday when he announced 50,000 more Nurses for the NHS.

should be easy for them to achieve asp as there 35,000 nursing vacancies in English health trusts alone at the moment

or maybe just sack 50,000 nurses and re hire them the next day job done

 

[ColchesterFC]

Isn't the simple answer to that question..."we will increase the number of nurses in the NHS by 50000. As part of that we need to retain those 19000 nurses already working in the NHS. If we recruit 50000 more nurses but those 19000 leave then we have only increased the total number by 31000".

 

[patricks148]

...and his pledge to get a new trade deal agreed with the EU in 2020 without the need for any extension simply smacks of the same sort of 'pledge' he gave to the country to leave the EU on 31st October - so just anther pledge that he does not have full control of. All he can guarantee on that front is that there will be no extension beyond end-2020 with an agreed deal or no deal agreed - because with a majority he will be able to choose to not request an extension - and that's it. He can't guarantee anything in respect of a deal.

don't worry he will just blame others for stoping him .... "getting it done"

 

[Grant85]

The less you promise, the less you have to justify and answer for.
boris has 1 priority and that is brexit, if he wins on that then afterwards he can say or do what he wants as he’ll have the perfect excuses, ie, success - he told us brexit needed to be done, disaster - not his fault, HoC delaying brexit by 3 years caused it.
Win, win for boris.

I don't disagree with the logic, but the issue is that the rest of the world keeps moving. There has to be some kind of domestic policy on pension, housing, transport, education etc. They've only been dragged into making commitments on health as it is basically the only thing Labour want to talk about.

If they don't have the policies in their manifesto and they win a majority... what is that a mandate for? Absolutely nothing beyond Brexit and a few high profile spending commitments that will be tough to deliver.

If the Tories get a majority (especially a decent one) I think this country will go backwards substantially over the next 5 years. Brexit is already shaping up to be a major issue with the next cliff edge in December 2020 and if they have a big majority, the Tories will do very little over the next term, except patting themselves on the back for getting rid of Corbyn and getting themselves into power for the next 5 years. We will see that the Tories don't actually care about what they do in Government, they just care about being there.

 

[ColchesterFC]

Royal Liverpool Hospital was supposed to cost £331m. There's another £140m added to that since Carillion's collapse. Bearing in mind RLH & Broadgreen wasn't a full build, call it £500m. Multiply that by 40. That's not a money tree required, its a money forest!

For all the perceived perception that the Tories manifesto is sensible, is it really?

It's fine. Nicky Morgan has done the calculations and worked out that it won't cost anything because included in the 40 additional hospitals will be 40 existing hospitals.

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

Certainly looks like boris lied again yesterday when he announced 50,000 more Nurses for the NHS.

If my Mrs is at all typical of nurses having left the NHS - to progress a career in another sector; retired or about to retire (and across her friends of same age she is) you'd have to pay her an awful lot of money to go back in to the NHS. Mind you - there are loads of WASPIs out there looking for an income...?

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

don't worry he will just blame others for stoping him .... "getting it done"

except with a majority he will have no-one to blame as all he is doing is negotiating a deal - and as every ful kno it takes two to tango and David Davies (remember him?) has already told us that the EU are tough negotiators - so Johnson KNOWS that the complex deal he needs to agree may be difficult to agree in his timescales.

And so I ask for the Top Level Plan. Starting with the timescales to the end of 2020. When is the last date the UK will realistically be able to request an extension if we want one. When do we need to get the framework of the agreement established. When do we need to get key elements of the agreement done by. How will parliament and the public know how well things are gong - whether the UK is on track to have a deal agreed by the end of 2020. And so on and so forth.

Ah - yes. Of course all of that is secret. Let's not give away our key negotiating cards. How naive of me for asking. Except we already have revealed our end point and key negotiating card - we'll be fully out by end 2020. The EU knows this and so if Johnson and the rest of his Conservative and Brexit Party actually want a deal - the EU are actually more in control of the negotiations than we might want given our walk-away No Deal position might not be that great.

One day in the next few months Javid is going to have to tell us what No Deal will actually mean if it looks like an agreed deal is not going to be possible in 2020 and Johnson will be dead in a ditch before requesting a transition extension.

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

I don't disagree with the logic, but the issue is that the rest of the world keeps moving. There has to be some kind of domestic policy on pension, housing, transport, education etc. They've only been dragged into making commitments on health as it is basically the only thing Labour want to talk about.

If they don't have the policies in their manifesto and they win a majority... what is that a mandate for? Absolutely nothing beyond Brexit and a few high profile spending commitments that will be tough to deliver.

If the Tories get a majority (especially a decent one) I think this country will go backwards substantially over the next 5 years. Brexit is already shaping up to be a major issue with the next cliff edge in December 2020 and if they have a big majority, the Tories will do very little over the next term, except patting themselves on the back for getting rid of Corbyn and getting themselves into power for the next 5 years. We will see that the Tories don't actually care about what they do in Government, they just care about being there.

I like it - if it's not in manifesto there is therefore no mandate for it

 

[Grant85]

If my Mrs is at all typical of nurses having left the NHS - to progress a career in another sector; retired or about to retire (and across her friends of same age she is) you'd have to pay her an awful lot of money to go back in to the NHS. Mind you - there are loads of WASPIs out there looking for an income...?

I think this is a big issue in terms of attracting or keeping people in the profession. Time was it used to be a great second income for a house if one partner was a teacher or a nurse (obviously it was usually the wife, but clearly no reason that it wouldn't be the husband). Could generally work around childcare and salary was good in the context of cost of living etc.

Now though things have moved on. People work flexibly, most working families balance child care around nursery and retired baby boomer grandparents and of course many households will have 2 parents that are professionals as opposed to working in vocational areas - such as nursing and teaching.

Ultimately being a teacher or a nurse at £35,000 or so is now no longer a great salary and I'm sure doesn't attract anything like the number of young people it once did. And sadly is certainly not going to attract many high achievers into these roles.

Basically the only solution to this is pay nurses & teachers a much higher salary and ensure that current staff and new entrants fulfil high standards.

My wife is a nurse and you might be surprised to learn that the biggest dent in morale is not pay or hospital buildings, it is colleagues phoning in sick and long term sickness. So as I said, raise the salary and raise the standards and those who think it's an easy 'job for life' can move on and they will find it much easier to retain and recruit staff by offering proper salaries.

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

and the staffin

It's fine. Nicky Morgan has done the calculations and worked out that it won't cost anything because included in the 40 additional hospitals will be 40 existing hospitals.

...and the staffing to replace the 19,000 who leave these 40 existing hospitals will come about by persuading the 19,000 nurses to stay.

BTW - have they looked at the number of retired nurses they'd have to recruit to replace the experienced part of the 19,000 who leave. Has anyone pointed out that a retired NHS nurse returning to work in the NHS and receiving a pension cannot earn more than they were earning when they retired? My wife could have returned to work in the NHS but she could only have worked 2-3 days a week due to her NHS pension limiting what she could earn on returning.

And for those lifetime nurses who retire at 55-60 - knackered and disillusioned with the NHS - on an annual pension and with a lump sum that can be £75k-£100k and more...they are going to take some persuading.

 

[Lord Tyrion]

Surely any politicians should be able to answer questions on details.
Doing it your way would mean interviewers accepting Labours spending plans and not quizzing them, that would be disastrous.

I'll fess up, I didn't play the piece until just now. I thought it was another one of those where they ask a politician to spell a trick word or answer a few mulitplication questions, I saw the headline 'Nicky Morgan has failed Year 1 maths' and made an assumption. Count me out of this one, scuttles away

 

[USER1999]

Sorry, but 35k is a decant wage, and way above the national average.

 

[Lord Tyrion]

Sorry, but 35k is a decant wage, and way above the national average.

It's also a secure job, pension etc. That is a very attractive wage imo.

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

I think this is a big issue in terms of attracting or keeping people in the profession. Time was it used to be a great second income for a house if one partner was a teacher or a nurse (obviously it was usually the wife, but clearly no reason that it wouldn't be the husband). Could generally work around childcare and salary was good in the context of cost of living etc.

Now though things have moved on. People work flexibly, most working families balance child care around nursery and retired baby boomer grandparents and of course many households will have 2 parents that are professionals as opposed to working in vocational areas - such as nursing and teaching.

Ultimately being a teacher or a nurse at £35,000 or so is now no longer a great salary and I'm sure doesn't attract anything like the number of young people it once did. And sadly is certainly not going to attract many high achievers into these roles.

Basically the only solution to this is pay nurses & teachers a much higher salary and ensure that current staff and new entrants fulfil high standards.

My wife is a nurse and you might be surprised to learn that the biggest dent in morale is not pay or hospital buildings, it is colleagues phoning in sick and long term sickness. So as I said, raise the salary and raise the standards and those who think it's an easy 'job for life' can move on and they will find it much easier to retain and recruit staff by offering proper salaries.

My daughter is 24. She graduated with a degree a couple of years back. Most of her school friends went to university. None of her dozen close university friends are going into nursing and only one is in teaching. Of her dozen school friends - only one has gone into nursing. When my wife went into nursing in the late 70s it was an attractive career option and many girls went into it. No longer.

And I for one am not surprised my your wife's experience. Indeed it was largely issues with staff and staffing that caused her to finish completely. When in remission after her cancer treatment she went back to work for a year but could not stand it. She has one ex-colleague who took over my wife's responsibilities who is in tears every day in the week leading up to a clinic that my wife used to run - it's not difficult - the ex-colleague is just useless. And the same colleague regularly goes off sick through stress - with no notice given whatsoever - often being told to go home - because she cannot cope with the job - yet the manager does not seem able to get anything done. And yes - long term sickness - the team has to struggle along short staffed as they can't afford to get temporary replacement.

My wife looks back in some horror, dismay and not a small amount of anger

 

[Hobbit]

and the staffin

...and the staffing to replace the 19,000 who leave these 40 existing hospitals will come about by persuading the 19,000 nurses to stay.

BTW - have they looked at the number of retired nurses they'd have to recruit to replace the experienced part of the 19,000 who leave. Has anyone pointed out that a retired NHS nurse returning to work in the NHS and receiving a pension cannot earn more than they were earning when they retired? My wife could have returned to work in the NHS but she could only have worked 2-3 days a week due to her NHS pension limiting what she could earn on returning.

And for those lifetime nurses who retire at 55-60 - knackered and disillusioned with the NHS - on an annual pension and with a lump sum that can be £75k-£100k and more...they are going to take some persuading.

One of our good friends has just put her papers in to trigger her pension and retire. Salary is an issue but the conditions they are working under are appalling, and dangerous. Dangerous for the patients and dangerous for the staff. Strong words? I'm sure you and Grant85 could share anecdotal evidence of just how bad it is but, perhaps, shouldn't. Whatever people may have read or heard in the media, the detail is worse.

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

It's also a secure job, pension etc. That is a very attractive wage imo.

it's too secure for some...

And it's not a particularly good wage for an experienced and well-educated nurse - working long hours (12+ hour days being common - and often actually planned shifts) - with no breaks and often (EDIT - almost always) a very high level of patient stress and expectation.

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

One of our good friends has just put her papers in to trigger her pension and retire. Salary is an issue but the conditions they are working under are appalling, and dangerous. Dangerous for the patients and dangerous for the staff. Strong words? I'm sure you and Grant85 could share anecdotal evidence of just how bad it is but, perhaps, shouldn't. Whatever people may have read or heard in the media, the detail is worse.

Yes - you are quite right. The anecdotal evidence that Grant85 and I could share is not for sharing - but he will I am sure be able to confirm the frustration and sometimes anger that our wives share with us on their return home - with my wife this was daily. And in the group of nurses that my wife training and worked with back in the 70s and early 80s and that she keeps in touch with - their experience is identical.

Meanwhile in my wife's new job in a charity she has a colleague who works part-time in the charity and part-time in the NHS. Her husband tells her that he knows when she has been doing an NHS day by the way she is when she gets home.

 

[Foxholer]

The less you promise, the less you have to justify and answer for.
boris has 1 priority and that is brexit, if he wins on that then afterwards he can say or do what he wants as he’ll have the perfect excuses, ie, success - he told us brexit needed to be done, disaster - not his fault, HoC delaying brexit by 3 years caused it.
Win, win for boris.

I fully expect him to get a working majority - and actually hope so for the sake of the UK. Any other result appears to go against my view that the Referendum should not be 're-run until the correct result is achieved'! I do have a little sympathy for Labour's approach (establish the 'deal' and then vote out/in based on that), but believe it's a cop-out for 'repeat referendum by back door' and am against too many of their other policies, even though they'd probably be a benefit for me.

Alas, that also grates severely with my attitude of Boris as a 'leader'! To me, he's simply a shallow bully who is prepared to spout whatever is needed (including lying) to get whatever message he believes is needed across. The BBC fact checking demonstrated this on a number of his claims!

Corbyn, on the other hand, appears to be unelectable! And his plans would, imo, set UK back decades!

 

[drdel]

Surely any politicians should be able to answer questions on details.
Doing it your way would mean interviewers accepting Labours spending plans and not quizzing them, that would be disastrous.

I expect politicians to set policy, structures etc just like I expect from senior management: its not necessary for them to be into all the fine detail - that's what we pay 'experts' for. There's always going to be some finer point that anyone can find/raise to catch some-one out. Journalistic game playing designed solely with the intention to make interviewee look small and themselves look good - waste of time IMO.

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

Indeed - and by not stating anything specific in respect of Social Care and any cap of individual contribution - then that can't be costed...