Skip to main content

That was the week

I started the week by considering how the wrong message had been taken from the Olympics and Paralympics. In 'If we invest in people we can win' I argued that medals had been won because support was given to the particular sports and to the individuals. If you invest in people you can produce winners. Hard work alone wasn't the key to success.

Contrary to the portrayal by Mr Cameron and his colleagues, the majority of those receiving welfare benefits are hard working and dedicated, day in and day out. But, for the poorest of them, he is cutting their support. They are winners and yet he is taking away from them the support they need to go on being winners; bread winners for their families. It really is a very cynical move by the government. They are making the poor pay the most for the mess the bankers got us into. I suspect  from their divisive rhetoric, Mr Duncan Smith offers a disingenuous and divisive comparison,  the assumption is that protecting middle income groups will win votes. They probably gave up long ago on attracting votes from the poorest. 

Privatisation in the National Health Service is gathering pace with fears of increasing fragmentation of service provision. More than 100 private firms will be commissioned by the NHS to provide basic services including physiotherapy, dermatology, hearing aids, MRI scanning, and psychological therapy. In 'Ideologically driven reform will undermine the NHS' I argued that this would make it easier to scale down provision by the NHS itself and would open the way for charging for these key services.

As with winter fuel allowances and bus passes for the elderly it will be argued that providing these services free for everyone regardless of wealth would be unfair, thus paving the way for the breech of the fundamental principle of the NHS that health care should be free at the point of delivery. A wedge will be driven deep into the heart of the NHS and the service will be cracked open. Consumer choice will become the principle guiding commissioning and delivery. It will all seem fair to those who can afford it. Once broken the NHS will be difficult to rebuild. It took decades of public funding and commitment to create; it might take just a few years to destroy. 

The impact of £20bn of cuts from the NHS budget was considered in two further articles challenging the assumption that cuts could be made without affecting front line services. In 'Don't believe it when they say front line services won't be cut' and 'NHS sleepwalking to a disaster' I questioned the assumption that the NHS and other services such as the police and social work had too many managers. All are affected by big cuts, and in all cases it is affecting the front line service. 


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Ian Duncan-Smith says he wants to make those on benefits 'better people'!

By any account, the government's austerity strategy is utilitarian. It justifies its approach by the presumed potential ends. It's objective is to cut the deficit, but it has also adopted another objective which is specifically targeted. It seeks to drive people off benefits and 'back to work'.  The two together are toxic to the poorest in society. Those least able to cope are the most affected by the cuts in benefits and the loss of services. It is the coupling of these two strategic aims that make their policies ethically questionable. For, by combining the two, slashing the value of benefits to make budget savings while also changing the benefits system, the highest burden falls on a specific group, those dependent on benefits. For the greater good of the majority, a minority group, those on benefits, are being sacrificed; sacrificed on the altar of austerity. And they are being sacrificed in part so that others may be spared. Utilitarian ethics considers the ba

The secret life of Giant Pandas

Giant pandas, Ailuropoda melanoleuca , have usually been regarded as solitary creatures, coming together only to mate; but recent studies have begun to reveal a secret social life for these enigmatic bears.  GPS tracking shows they cross each others path more often than previously thought, and spend time together.  What we don't know is what they are doing when together.  Photo by  Sid Balachandran  on  Unsplash For such large mammals, pandas have relatively small home ranges. Perhaps this is no surprise. Pandas feed almost exclusively on bamboo. The only real threat to pandas has come from humans. No wonder then that the panda is the symbol of the WWF.  Pandas communicate with one another through vocalization and scent marking. They spray urine, claw tree trunks and rub against objects to mark their paths, yet they do not appear to be territorial as individuals.  Pandas are 99% vegetarian, but, oddly, their digestive system is more typical of a carnivore. For the 1% of their diet

Work Capability Assessments cause suffering for the mentally ill

People suffering from mental health problems are often the most vulnerable when seeking help. Mental health can have a major impact on work, housing, relationships and finances. The Work Capability Assessments (WCA) thus present a particular challenge to those suffering mental illness.  The mentally ill also are often the least able to present their case. Staff involved in assessments lack sufficient expertise or training to understand mental health issues and how they affect capability. Because of  concerns that Work Capability Assessments will have a particularly detrimental effect on the mentally ill,  an  e-petition  on the government web site calls on the Department of Work and Pensions to exclude people with complex mental health problems such as paranoid schizophrenia and personality disorders. Problems with the WCA  have been highlighted in general by the fact that up to 78% of 'fit to work' decisions are  being overturned on appeal. It is all to the good that they