My dad wasn’t British so couldn’t vote. But what he did do was instill in me and siblings was a sense of fairness, a love of my fellow man Protect those that need and a sense of solidarity with those around me on the social scale. My dad worked at Doxfords and later at Vane Tempest Colliery worked every weekend and 1/2 shift he could. He had to he fathered 8 of us in Pennywell. Through social policies and free education half of his children have university degrees and all have done well in life. But he gave us the above values that last a lifetime. If you want the same level education field for your children and grandchildren how the fooking heck can ordinary folk vote for party that will ABSOLUTELY NOT give you this. TIME FOR A CHANGE TIME FOR INTEGRITY vote for a PARTY not a man KTF
Firstly, (and most importantly), good luck with the treatment. I can join you in the sentiment though, based on the last few years. Having hardly bothered the NHS for well over 60 years, arthritis kicked in and I now move about with two new hips and a new knee. So far the other knee is OK. And I've had a hernia repaired. One of the replacement ops was delayed due to a lash up in the clerical systems but it was all ok in the end. No complaints from me, not even about the six months delay. I don't expect a perfect World and I know that people make mistakes.I'm also aware that it wouldn't be cost effective to build and staff hospitals to cope with every possible eventuality and emergency.
When they sold British Gas and when they sold British Telecom - that was putting millions A DAY into the exchequer allthose profits stopped comming to US and went into their mates pockets. IT’S WHAT THEY DO !!!!! Why should us the plebs benefit when the few shareholders can grab it all. TIME TO THINK OF THE MANY NOT THE SUPER RICH KTF
Saffy, Saffy mate your a victim of the big bad wolf ‘fake news please read. Google it it is out there.
But most of those things were privatised because they were poorly run, over-unionised, and were being propped up by the tax-payer. The theory was that private ownership could offer a better service (although in hindsight maybe not). That's not going to happen with the NHS because it's a more complicated beast. No one but the drug firms will benefit from increased prices.
I wouldn't for a moment knock your idealism, I think I had it too, many years ago. Now I've reached the age when I don't think that it makes much difference which bunch of opportunists is in charge of the gravy train. Don't get me wrong. Honest politicians exist. I believe that Chris Mullings was one. But in general they are as rare as hen's teeth. For a couple of examples consider--- Our local MP's happily oppose Brexit, irrespective of the majority of the local voters being in favour of it. Our views are presumably considered as being of no value although they all value our votes. Then we have one of my favorites. The Private Finance Initiative. First introduced by John Major this was bitterly opposed by Labour as 'back door privatisation'. Not long afterwards Labour took power. Did they scrap, or at very least discontinue this policy? No. They expanded it introducing an NHS version just for hospitals. So now the NHS has a further bill to pay. And the Tory Party felt it was their turn to be critical. I should add that I'm not criticising either Party for this policy though I've always thought of it as a bit shady it fitted the bill at the time. My point is that it is a reasonable idea to consider the vast majority of the weeping and wailing that comes from ALL politicians as being opportunistic crocodile tears.
The law introducing university tuition fees was voted in in 1998 under a Labour government. In 2003, under a Labour government, a law was passed allowing universities to se their own tuition rates. However, in 2018, Conservative PM Theresa May launched a review which was set to explore possible alternatives to tuition fees. I was in the first year of students who couldn't claim a full university grant. It was Labour that took away free education.
That confirms what I've said. Chairs were available so the parents could have lay him down on them or sat on them and cuddled him. Instead they chose to lie him on a hospital floor, take a picture and send it to the media.
No, Clocky . . . . the point is that his guardian (parent or whoever) decided to put him on the cold floor (knowing that he possibly had pneumonia) rather than carry/cuddle him making use of the chairs available, purely for a 'photo opportunity
That's not a point, mate. The hospital have stated that it was unusually busy. We have to accept there's going to be times like that. I think folks expectations are too high of the NHS. They'll be quiet times and busy periods. We just have to roll with that. As Gordon has reiterated, seats were available for the parents and child, but parent decided not to use the chairs and opted to lie the child on the floor.
So according to that article, retaining first past the post, updating parliamentary boundaries, reviewing the fixed term parliaments act (introduced by the Tories in 2011), and fixing the voting age at 18 are factors that amount to 'tyranny'. I'm terrified. What absolute scaremongering. There's definitely no pro-Labour agenda there is there? There are worrying things on that Page 48, like not continuing with the Leveson enquiry, but it certainly doesn't amount to tyranny. And to top it all off, this completely biased article opens by accusing the BBC of bias. Why can't we have balanced reporting? Ridiculous things like this are just driving the divide and polarising people further.
