Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » If the Cabinet exit betting is right male ministers have le

SystemSystem Posts: 11,002
edited June 2013 in General

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » If the Cabinet exit betting is right male ministers have less to fear in coming cabinet reshuffle than the women

The biggest oddity in the top 8 list must be Michael Gove. I just can’t see him being demoted. He’ll stay, surely, with education where he’s seen by his party if not the wider electorate, as doing a good job.

Read the full story here


Comments

  • GeoffMGeoffM Posts: 6,071
    First?
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    I earlier wrote, Greening, Villiers and Miller will go. Cable, if he agrees.
  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    If any others PBers are missing contributions from Lucian Fletcher - he's on Twitter instead at https://twitter.com/DavidRoe92
  • MikeKMikeK Posts: 9,053
    I once thought that Greening had potential, sadly she has proved me wrong.
    Villiers is weak but she is popular in some government quarters.
    W hat can one say about Maria Miller? Anything?
  • john_zimsjohn_zims Posts: 3,399
    @Surbiton

    So Ball's is going to follow Labour's NHS cuts in Wales,he's onto a winner there.
  • QuincelQuincel Posts: 3,949
    Gove is very short given the circumstances, but how about Clegg at 12/1. Surely the only way he leaves the cabinet is in a leadership challenge or untimely death? 12/1 to be next?! Madness.
  • MikeSmithsonMikeSmithson Posts: 7,382
    I've just bet at 25/1 on the LD Scots Sec Michael Moore. He's not done anything wrong but it would open up a vacancy for Jo Swinson.

  • GrandioseGrandiose Posts: 2,323
    Surbiton:

    "The Tories have been telling us that cutting funding to services need not harm their quality. On health, they now say the opposite. The Conservatives might be the party of “tough decisions”, but the Labour party could become the party of “really tough decisions”!"

    Do you think that will be the line that Labour will take in 2015? They'll need to run with it if they want it to work. Surely it would mean some further break with defending the past, which the party has been hesitant to do thusfar?
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    Surely the biggest oddity must be Clegg? Gove and May pretty odd as well - I suspect that they pick up some money based on name recognition rather than anything else.

    Other than that, I've just looked at the list of Con males in the Cabinet. It's tough to say that any of them *deserve* to be more likely to be kicked out than the women on the list above. [I think Hunt is doing fine] What this says to me is that there is a willingness by Cameron to promote women to Cabinet who either lack sufficient experience or who aren't up to scratch.

    I look forward to the day when Cabinet positions are merit based (or at least faction based) rather than purely on someone's sex(uality), colour or religion.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 48,922
    Is it true there are no LibDem women ministers in the Cabinet?
  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724

    Is it true there are no LibDem women ministers in the Cabinet?

    There are certainly more LD MPs with Knighthoods than female LD MPs. That's quite a remarkable elite stat.
  • MikeKMikeK Posts: 9,053
    edited June 2013
    This is too good for a laugh to miss:

    @RobWilson_RDG
    Ed Miliband's speech can be summarised very simply: 'Tough on sardines tough on and the causes of sardines.' #sameoldLabour #fishyonspending
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,774
    I forecast that by the end of 2015, there will soon be twice as many ex-Liberal Democrat MPs as actual Liberal Democrat MPs...
  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    MikeK said:

    This is too good for a laugh to miss:

    @RobWilson_RDG
    Ed Miliband's speech can be summarised very simply: 'Tough on sardines tough on and the causes of sardines.' #sameoldLabour #fishyonspending

    PR for sardines may swing the next HMG mind - Clegg is setting it out as his red-line - shame the voters don't give a toss about it...
  • stjohnstjohn Posts: 1,777
    FTPT

    I've backed Henry at 55-60 on Betfair.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    edited June 2013
    rcs1000 said:

    I forecast that by the end of 2015, there will soon be twice as many ex-Liberal Democrat MPs as actual Liberal Democrat MPs...

    Hmmh, that could create a peverse incentive (tontine style) if someone was to take the otherside of that bet....
  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    Some of these are fab - alternative PM Days

    Stuart Wilks-Heeg @StuartWilksHeeg

    @philipjcowley Chamberlain Day, when the written agreement about towels on sun loungers turns out to be meaningless.

    More here http://nottspolitics.org/2013/06/21/margaret-thatcher-day/
  • AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815
    edited June 2013
    The recent odds for cabinet reshuffle exit have been overly influenced by the 2015-16 round of spending cuts. Philip Hammond being touted for an exit was an obvious example of pressure being brought to bear on the SoS for Defence..

    Having said that, only Maria Miller of the four women is affected by this factor, now that Teresa May has settled the Home Office cuts without fuss. Although Miller has also settled, she is claiming victory over the Treasury through "obstinacy": keeping the cuts imposed on the DCMS to a "reasonable 8%". Still this is more likely to be condoned personal PR to appease the luvvies rather than being indicative of a real split with Osborne. Both Villiers and Greening have the luxury of having additional, albeit small, amounts of money being thrown at them.

    Bearing in mind that Villiers, Greening and Miller all have short incumbencies in their departments none look "most likely" candidates for reshuffling especially as they may all have topped out on prospects for promotion.

    The same doesn't apply to May, but unless Hague is stepping down (unlikely) or Osborne wants to move (highly unlikely), then the only feasible office for her would be Party Chairman in charge at the time of the election. This would be a good and brave move by Cameron but there are many arguments against. Giving May control of the party could increase risk to the Cameron/Osborne leadership; May's success at the Home Office argues for the principle of "if it ain't broke don't mend it"; Shapps hasn't either failed or had a long enough run as Joint-Chairman; May has already been Chairman, albeit in opposition and not at the time of an election; there is no obvious better candidate for the Home Office.

    So, absent of some unknown personality clash with the inner circle, I can't see any of the four women going or even justifying their exit odds.

    The whole reshuffle story looks a bit dull at the moment. Perhaps the only way to liven it up would be talk of swapping some Lib Dem and Tory departments. Alexander deserves full control of a major department (Defence?); Cable would be a great evangelist for the economic upturn as Chief Secretary (the spending decisions affecting this term are done); Hammond could replace Cable; Energy needs a no-nonsense Tory and the Lib Dems could benefit from Local Government.

    Much more fun talking of Lib Dem - Tory swaps than continuing with the false "the fops ignore women" meme.

  • isamisam Posts: 40,731
    Prince Peter
    Princess Olive
    Princess Valerie
    Princess Doroty
    Princess Constance
    Princess Edith

    Any major reasons why these could be a no no?
  • AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815
    edited June 2013
    tim said:

    Osborne briefs against women in the cabinet, always has done.
    Hence the prices

    tim follows his leader by adopting 'PB Tory' tactics.

    Anecdotal evidence rules.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    isam said:

    Prince Peter
    Princess Olive
    Princess Valerie
    Princess Doroty
    Princess Constance
    Princess Edith

    Any major reasons why these could be a no no?

    Windors tend to stick to family names
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 38,519
    Sad news: a death at the Le Mans race.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-23014877

    RIP Allan Simonsen.
  • AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815
    Does anyone know the whereabouts of the Nabavi of All Sussex?

    I realise that he tends to be at the opera house on Saturday evenings but he seems to have been absent for nigh on a week.

    I hope all is OK.
  • AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815
    stjohn said:

    FTPT

    I've backed Henry at 55-60 on Betfair.

    Hooray!
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 48,922
    isam said:

    Prince Peter
    Princess Olive
    Princess Valerie
    Princess Doroty
    Princess Constance
    Princess Edith

    Any major reasons why these could be a no no?

    Princess Sue Neil?

    :)
  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530
    Dear god, Dan Hodges is let loose on BBC news. Things must be bad if little Ed has to rely on the likes of him to spin his 'keep the cuts' tory triangulation.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 48,922
    AveryLP said:

    tim said:

    Osborne briefs against women in the cabinet, always has done.
    Hence the prices

    tim follows his leader by adopting 'PB Tory' tactics.

    Anecdotal evidence rules.
    tim is merely a Tory agent provocateur. Pay him no mind :)
  • AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815

    AveryLP said:

    tim said:

    Osborne briefs against women in the cabinet, always has done.
    Hence the prices

    tim follows his leader by adopting 'PB Tory' tactics.

    Anecdotal evidence rules.
    ... a Tory agent provocateur ...
    What Pork might term Cammie Knickers?

  • john_zimsjohn_zims Posts: 3,399
    @Grandiose

    ' but the Labour party could become the party of “really tough decisions”!"

    Labour the party of really frequent u-turns?
  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530
    edited June 2013
    Since Osbrowne would be master strategising any reshuffle who knows what further amusement he could provide us with. There was the talk of bringing back Liam Fox (mostly from Liam Fox and his chums) though if Cammie does have any reshuffle he'll likely want it to be small but still make it look like he's listening to his backbenchers since more trouble from them down the line is pretty much guaranteed.

    In which case bringing in some of those perceived as more backbench friendly while jettisoning those who aren't crucial to the chumocracy would seem to be the way he and Osbrowne would go and the betting is reflecting that for the most part.

    As for the lib dems, well Clegg's had a bit of a nightmare since Rennard (and not a "fleeting" one) so movement on a woman could well be on the cards. Moore? Possible. Looks far more likely than Vince or Clegg himself.

    Clegg's on the list because of his recent self-inflicted problems and the lib dems still doing much the same as they have been. Clegg's unpopularity tends to feed in to that even if no obvious exit seems apparent yet. Farron isn't in the cabinet but that doesn't stop him being among the favourites to eventually replace Clegg as leader.

    The deputy PM is a fairly odd job in the first place under the coalition. Should there be a lib dem distancing and decoupling before the next election then it's quite possible that Clegg or any new leader would find another title and role as they campaigned. That would make the bet on 'next cabinet exit' a longer term one so if you think there just won't be any more reshuffles or shorter term 'surprise' exits it could be worth considering.

  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,933
    Miss Plato, those PM days are rather good.

    I wonder if Roman Emperor days (or other classical chaps) would work as well...
  • dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 11,279
    From tonight, for the first time in 200 years, Royal Navy officers aboard ship will no longer utter the traditional Saturday night toast to “Our Wives and Sweethearts”.
    The toast, which elicits the unofficial response: “May they never meet!”

    The toast is now change to Our Families by order of Vice Admiral David Steel...
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,933
    On topic:
    I'm surprised May's on the list. Considering the political graveyard that is the Home Office she's generally done well (that stupid cock-up over the dates with Qatada, which is probably due to legal advice rather than herself, aside).

    I also think future Prime Minister Greening should have longer odds, but her clear disagreement with the ridiculous consensus on aid spending and being shunted to that post does suggest she's out of favour.

    I haven't kept abreast of all the Government's wibbling on internet safety, but the seeming conflation of legal whacking material, vile images of children and the bizarre notion that somehow everything horrid can be get rid of and we should make the whole internet suitable for an inquisitive seven year old has not been the most intellectually coherent of policies.
  • NeilNeil Posts: 7,983
    o/t - I think pbc has moved Paddy Power's odds of a gay marriage referendum in Ireland in 2014 from 8/5 to 11/10. Given the Deputy PM has fairly firmly suggested that date and given that Labour has to start delivering things for its supporters I think 11/10 is still value.
  • NeilNeil Posts: 7,983
    On topic - I cant see Miller going unless it's due to DCMS being abolished and her not finding another slot. She's quite impressive, female and the only big stain on her copybook is the rollout of broadband which isnt really her fault.
  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530
    Tom Harris ‏@TomHarrisMP 4h

    There was me opposing a future Labour-LibDem coalition, and now Clegg does my job for me, by insisting on PR for local government!
    Despite Tom's somewhat academic contribution to future labour scenarios (now that he's out of the shadow cabinet) it's worth bearing in mind that some of us always thought it was strange that the lib dems didn't push hard for this while they were in coalition and had some power. Indeed it seemed like a perfect fit to exchange that for boundary changes once the tory backbenches had helpfully killed lords reform.

    You would think it a bit of a mistake to remind the lib dem grass roots of the things they might now have with a better negotiating team and leader. No doubt Clegg's PR team know best as they have been playing a blinder of late. ;)
  • JamesKellyJamesKelly Posts: 1,348
    "Tom Harris ‏@TomHarrisMP 4h

    There was me opposing a future Labour-LibDem coalition, and now Clegg does my job for me, by insisting on PR for local government!"


    Tom must be thinking of that time the Lib Dems' insistence on PR for local government scuppered a coalition deal with Labour at Holyrood in 2003.

    Oh wait...
  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530
    edited June 2013

    "Tom Harris ‏@TomHarrisMP 4h

    There was me opposing a future Labour-LibDem coalition, and now Clegg does my job for me, by insisting on PR for local government!"


    Tom must be thinking of that time the Lib Dems' insistence on PR for local government scuppered a coalition deal with Labour at Holyrood in 2003.

    Oh wait...

    I fear Tom's 'more time with the family' has not granted him any further wisdom. ;)

    It also underlines just how little attention Clegg has been paying to the scotish lib dems since it's almost inconceivable they would not have raised that and the prospect of it for local government elsewhere. I say almost because we have to remember the scottish lib dems have had the likes of Willie Rennie doing Clegg's bidding for the past couple of years.

  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    The Cabinet exit betting looks wrong.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 38,519
    Theresa May should be safe; she's had a fairly steady hand on the tiller in a role that is very open to controversy. Having said that, she's been in the position for three years, more than most of her predeccessors. Straw and Howard managed four years, Blunkett three and a half.

    Clarke, Reid, Johnson and Smith all managed less, so I'd be surprised if she manages to the next election, which would make her the longest-serving home secretary since Butler in 1962 (*). That would be an achievement.

    (*) I hope I'm right in saying that ...
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    Off topic, because it's quiet, it's gloriously hot in Hungary at present. I'm sat outside drinking rosé and it's about 25C. Life is sweet sometimes.

    Somehow tomorrow, between picking the cherries and the blackcurrants, I have to force myself to review 20 appraisal forms and make the various objectives compatible. That is going to be a struggle.
  • FinancierFinancier Posts: 3,916
    Two of the weakest performing departments are Business (Cable) and Energy (Huhne/Davey). Both are held by the LDs,perhaps some Cons should energise these ministries as they are vital to the UK's future..

    Perhaps DC will change some of the Cabinet posts. Put International Development under the FO. Put Wales, Scotland and NI under one ministry - give it to a LD. Make universities and FE as a separate ministry - away from business. Take food and fisheries out of Environment.

    .
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    Sunny Hundal is really unimpressed with Ed Miliband's speech:

    http://liberalconspiracy.org/2013/06/22/ed-milibands-decision-on-osbornes-cuts-is-economic-nonsense-and-political-folly/

    I thought Ed Miliband's speech was very good, but Labour need wholeheartedly to develop the theme of "socialism in a cold climate". This isn't something where Ed Miliband can make the occasional speech and then pretend he hadn't said anything.
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    antifrank said:

    Off topic, because it's quiet, it's gloriously hot in Hungary at present. I'm sat outside drinking rosé and it's about 25C. Life is sweet sometimes.

    Somehow tomorrow, between picking the cherries and the blackcurrants, I have to force myself to review 20 appraisal forms and make the various objectives compatible. That is going to be a struggle.

    I am going to be in Budapest in August, for a couple of days. Was there much flood damage? Are Euros accepted in tourist areas or just forint?
  • FinancierFinancier Posts: 3,916
    The Dutch coalition government says the time of "ever closer union" in all EU policy areas is over.

    The government, led by liberal Prime Minister Mark Rutte, set out its stance on EU powers in a letter to parliament.

    The Netherlands wants to keep control over social security, working conditions and media regulation.

    The initiative is similar to the UK government's current "balance of competences" review, aimed at assessing where EU powers may extend too far.

    Mr Rutte formed a coalition with the centre-left Labour Party after narrowly winning an election last October.

    The Dutch coalition is seen as generally pro-EU and pro-austerity. It is not preparing the ground for a referendum on EU membership, in contrast with Prime Minister David Cameron's Conservatives in the UK.

    But the Dutch government website said the letter, presented by Foreign Minister Frans Timmermans, would feed into broader discussions on EU powers in Europe.

    "The Netherlands is convinced that the time of an 'ever closer union' in every possible policy area is behind us," the website said, reporting the letter.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-23005499
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    @foxinsoxuk Zero flood damage in Budapest. The flood defence systems in Budapest are really clever (not high tech, just clever). They've never been breached yet. The river levels are now low again.

    I always get forints and have never tried spending Euros, though I expect they're accepted. I just use cash machines.
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    Financier said:

    Two of the weakest performing departments are Business (Cable) and Energy (Huhne/Davey). Both are held by the LDs,perhaps some Cons should energise these ministries as they are vital to the UK's future..

    Perhaps DC will change some of the Cabinet posts. Put International Development under the FO. Put Wales, Scotland and NI under one ministry - give it to a LD. Make universities and FE as a separate ministry - away from business. Take food and fisheries out of Environment.

    .

    Cable has been pretty useless in Business, and I agree that Energy policy is equally lame. Difficult to move them on without Cleggs permission though.

    I cannot see a big reshuffle on the cards, mostly cosmetic changes such as pensioning off Clarke, but there may be some scope to reshuffle lower ranks.
  • AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815
    edited June 2013
    antifrank said:

    @foxinsoxuk Zero flood damage in Budapest. The flood defence systems in Budapest are really clever (not high tech, just clever). They've never been breached yet. The river levels are now low again.

    I always get forints and have never tried spending Euros, though I expect they're accepted. I just use cash machines.

    And if you haven't already made arrangements for accommodation stay at the Hotel Gellért overlooking the Danube from the Buda side. Bring your swimming trunks.
  • AndreaParma_82AndreaParma_82 Posts: 4,714
    edited June 2013
    The Daily Record (aka Scottish Labour Press Release Archive) run a piece suggesting Gordon could stand again at next GE.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    Even if you have made accommodation arrangements, make sure you visit the thermal baths in the Gellért. They're open to anyone and are spectacular (though my female sources tell me that the women's sections are nowhere near as nice as the men's sections).

    Another good thermal bath option is the Széchenyi baths. But for even the most casual tourist, a trip to at least one of the thermal baths is a must.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 38,519
    As it is quiet, for anyone wanting to watch the Le Mans 24 hours, coverage can be found for free at:

    http://www.24h-lemans.com/live/en/

    Still 16hrs 30 minutes to go. Toyota leading from Audi, then Lola. Lola is particularly remarkable as the company went into administration at the end of last year. I'd love them to get one last victory.

    Amazing racing in the dark. All the drivers are absolutely incredible. IMHO 24-hour sports car racing is the pinnacle of motorsport, much more so than F1 in the prototype classes.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    Paywall
    Former health secretary Andy Burnham has denied accusations that he put pressure on the care watchdog in the run up to the 2010 election to tone down criticisms of an NHS trust where mothers and babies were dying.

    Mr Burnham faced questions over whether he had influenced the Care Quality Commission (CQC) at the time that it gave Morecambe Bay NHS Trust a clean bill of health despite a series of deaths at Furness General Hospital.
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    antifrank said:

    Even if you have made accommodation arrangements, make sure you visit the thermal baths in the Gellért. They're open to anyone and are spectacular (though my female sources tell me that the women's sections are nowhere near as nice as the men's sections).

    Another good thermal bath option is the Széchenyi baths. But for even the most casual tourist, a trip to at least one of the thermal baths is a must.

    I am planning to take them in, always nice to have a swim in the sunshine. I have a couple of days and am just planning to be fairly flexible as will be traveling with my teenage son. We are traveling by train so staying near the station.

    Some eating recommendations would be welcomed, he likes to try local foods, but nowhere too stuffy and formal. Any recommendations?

  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    Questions were raised over Mr Burnham’s actions by David Morris, the Tory MP for Morecambe and Lunesdale, who wrote an open letter to him in which he blamed the Labour government’s “twin cultures of secrecy and putting targets before patients” for the scandals in both Morecambe and Stafford hospitals.

    He asked Mr Burnham: “How much ’pressure’ did you put on the CQC to ‘tone down’ its criticism of hospitals? You were the Labour Secretary of State for Health, when the first whitewash inspection of the Morecambe Bay NHS trust occurred in the spring of 2010.

    “This was a crucial pre-election season for you. The chair of the CQC at the time, Baroness Young, later said that health ministers - including you, who she specifically named when giving evidence on Mid Staffs - had put the regulator under ’pressure’ to ’tone down’ criticism of hospitals around that period.”
  • AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815
    edited June 2013

    antifrank said:

    Even if you have made accommodation arrangements, make sure you visit the thermal baths in the Gellért. They're open to anyone and are spectacular (though my female sources tell me that the women's sections are nowhere near as nice as the men's sections).

    Another good thermal bath option is the Széchenyi baths. But for even the most casual tourist, a trip to at least one of the thermal baths is a must.

    I am planning to take them in, always nice to have a swim in the sunshine. I have a couple of days and am just planning to be fairly flexible as will be traveling with my teenage son. We are traveling by train so staying near the station.

    Some eating recommendations would be welcomed, he likes to try local foods, but nowhere too stuffy and formal. Any recommendations?

    antifrank will be much more up to date than me, but for a short visit you have to choose a restaurant serving traditional hungarian food (foie gras, goulash, cold cherry soup etc) with a live csárdás (gipsy music) band. If hot there are some with outside eating.

    Most are a bit touristy but that I guess is what you want given the need to absorb local flavour in only two days.

    I think Voros Postakocsi was the one I was most often taken to by my banking counterparts. antifrank no doubt be able to advise better options of similar type.
  • NeilNeil Posts: 7,983
    On topic - some interesting Paddy Power reshuffle markets:

    http://www.paddypower.com/bet/politics/other-politics/uk-politics?ev_oc_grp_ids=1253128

    (1) how many will leave
    (2) proportion of women in new cabinet
    (3) proportion of Oxbridge graduates in new cabinet
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    Food recommendations: Café Bouchon on Zichy Jenő utca serves Hungarian influenced food of good quality in a relaxed bistro atmosphere. The maitre d', László, is a great guy who loves his food (as is obvious the moment you see him) and he knows his wine. I'd definitely recommend that. If you go there, ask the staff for a steer on what to eat and drink, they know their stuff.

    The cafe in the Gresham Palace hotel is a good place for lunch and gives you the excuse to have a nose around an amazing hotel.

    Most of the restaurants in the downtown Pest area are tourist traps but Duna Corso on the river, which looks as though it should be a tourist trap, is a longstanding restaurant frequented by locals.

    Café Kör was voted one of the 100 best restaurants in the world, which is ridiculous, but like Café Bouchon it is a lively place to have good local food.

    I would also recommend Mak, Tigris and Két Szerecsen.

    On the Buda side, most of the restaurants are more expensive. If you have to eat in the Castle district, I'd recommend Speiz.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 38,519
    tim said:

    Scott_P said:

    Paywall

    Former health secretary Andy Burnham has denied accusations that he put pressure on the care watchdog in the run up to the 2010 election to tone down criticisms of an NHS trust where mothers and babies were dying.

    Mr Burnham faced questions over whether he had influenced the Care Quality Commission (CQC) at the time that it gave Morecambe Bay NHS Trust a clean bill of health despite a series of deaths at Furness General Hospital.
    Given that the CQC report giving Furness a clean bill of health happened when Lansley was Health Secretary do explain it to us Surge

    Do explain why you're trying to divert attention from the fact the deaths of mothers and babies occurred when Labour was in charge.

    Labour's NHS. Labour's deaths.

    As for you trying to blame Lansley for the CQC mess: an organisation set up by Labour, with Labour appointees in charge. The farcically incorrect report that gave the Morecombe trust an all-clear occurred at the changeover between the governments. Hardly Lansley's fault.
    April 2010: University Hospitals of Morecambe Bay NHS Trust given the all-clear by the health regulatory for England, the CQC.
    (2) Section 2.6 of (3) gives a definitive timeline.

    Also note:
    The Fielding review had presented its initial report (on 31 March 2010) but not its final report, when CQC registered UHMB without compliance conditions (on 1 April 2010).
    (3)

    In other words, a report that was highly critical of the trust was available when the CQC gave the trust a clean bill of health despite the existence of a highly critical report that allegedly they did not get to see until the next year.

    By all accounts, the inquiry into the CQC that was suppressed was an internal one. From Grant Thornton's report - section 1.17 of (3) :
    However, we did find evidence of the apparently deliberate suppression of an
    internal CQC report entitled "Summary of the internal review of the regulatory decisions and
    activity at UHMB", which was commissioned by senior management in October 2011
    Whether Lansley knew, or should have known, about it, is an interesting question that we should get to the bottom of. Lansley will have questions with regards to (1).

    However, these questions are minor compared to the ones Labour have to answer over what happened on their watch.

    Grant Thornton's report is well worth a read. It depicts an utter shambles, of people not knowing what was going on even in terms of investigations, yet alone with regards to clinical matters.

    (1): http://news.sky.com/story/1106964/lansley-was-warned-of-baby-deaths-in-2010 .
    (2): http://www.itv.com/news/update/2013-06-19/timeline-furness-hospital-scandal-and-cover-up/
    (3): http://www.cqc.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/documents/grant_thornton_uk_llp_morecambe_bay.pdf
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 26,286
    Another golden opportunity to listen to the most risibly out-of-touch political interview of modern times:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zHD2tV9_ohI&amp
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    antifrank said:

    Food recommendations: Café Bouchon on Zichy Jenő utca serves Hungarian influenced food of good quality in a relaxed bistro atmosphere. The maitre d', László, is a great guy who loves his food (as is obvious the moment you see him) and he knows his wine. I'd definitely recommend that. If you go there, ask the staff for a steer on what to eat and drink, they know their stuff.

    The cafe in the Gresham Palace hotel is a good place for lunch and gives you the excuse to have a nose around an amazing hotel.

    Most of the restaurants in the downtown Pest area are tourist traps but Duna Corso on the river, which looks as though it should be a tourist trap, is a longstanding restaurant frequented by locals.

    Café Kör was voted one of the 100 best restaurants in the world, which is ridiculous, but like Café Bouchon it is a lively place to have good local food.

    I would also recommend Mak, Tigris and Két Szerecsen.

    On the Buda side, most of the restaurants are more expensive. If you have to eat in the Castle district, I'd recommend Speiz.

    Thanks for the recommendations. Cafe Bouchon sounds good on TripAdvisor, and not too far from where we will be staying.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    Where are you staying? The antifrank Budapest residence is within 400m of Café Bouchon.
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    antifrank said:

    Where are you staying? The antifrank Budapest residence is within 400m of Café Bouchon.


    We are staying at this place:

    http://www.tripadvisor.co.uk/Hotel_Review-g274887-d1655445-Reviews-Continental_Hotel_Zara_Budapest-Budapest_Central_Hungary.html

    It looked interesting, and not too far from the railway station. A good price on booking.com also.

    We are arriving on the Krakow sleeper train so may need to have a nap and swim before sightseeing.
  • JonathanDJonathanD Posts: 2,400
    @Josias

    The Telegraph has more details on the CQC timeline

    "Roger Davidson lost his job as head of media and public affairs for the Care Quality Commission just before the 2010 general election — after telling how a quarter of NHS trusts had failed to meet basic hygiene standards.
    He was forced to sign a gagging order when he left and was told that the CQC was “railing against” his action to “highlight issues”."


    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/10137029/Speaking-out-cost-NHS-whistleblower-his-job.html
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    JonathanD said:


    "Roger Davidson lost his job as head of media and public affairs for the Care Quality Commission just before the 2010 general election

    I blame Andrew Lansley. Oh, wait...
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 38,879

    tim said:

    Scott_P said:

    Paywall

    Former health secretary Andy Burnham has denied accusations that he put pressure on the care watchdog in the run up to the 2010 election to tone down criticisms of an NHS trust where mothers and babies were dying.

    Mr Burnham faced questions over whether he had influenced the Care Quality Commission (CQC) at the time that it gave Morecambe Bay NHS Trust a clean bill of health despite a series of deaths at Furness General Hospital.
    Given that the CQC report giving Furness a clean bill of health happened when Lansley was Health Secretary do explain it to us Surge
    Do explain why you're trying to divert attention from the fact the deaths of mothers and babies occurred when Labour was in charge.

    Labour's NHS. Labour's deaths.

    As for you trying to blame Lansley for the CQC mess: an organisation set up by Labour, with Labour appointees in charge. The farcically incorrect report that gave the Morecombe trust an all-clear occurred at the changeover between the governments. Hardly Lansley's fault.
    April 2010: University Hospitals of Morecambe Bay NHS Trust given the all-clear by the health regulatory for England, the CQC.
    (2) Section 2.6 of (3) gives a definitive timeline.

    Also note:
    The Fielding review had presented its initial report (on 31 March 2010) but not its final report, when CQC registered UHMB without compliance conditions (on 1 April 2010).
    (3)

    In other words, a report that was highly critical of the trust was available when the CQC gave the trust a clean bill of health despite the existence of a highly critical report that allegedly they did not get to see until the next year.

    By all accounts, the inquiry into the CQC that was suppressed was an internal one. From Grant Thornton's report - section 1.17 of (3) :
    However, we did find evidence of the apparently deliberate suppression of an
    internal CQC report entitled "Summary of the internal review of the regulatory decisions and
    activity at UHMB", which was commissioned by senior management in October 2011
    Whether Lansley knew, or should have known, about it, is an interesting question that we should get to the bottom of. Lansley will have questions with regards to (1).

    However, these questions are minor compared to the ones Labour have to answer over what happened on their watch.

    Grant Thornton's report is well worth a read. It depicts an utter shambles, of people not knowing what was going on even in terms of investigations, yet alone with regards to clinical matters.

    (1): http://news.sky.com/story/1106964/lansley-was-warned-of-baby-deaths-in-2010 .
    (2): http://www.itv.com/news/update/2013-06-19/timeline-furness-hospital-scandal-and-cover-up/
    (3): http://www.cqc.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/documents/grant_thornton_uk_llp_morecambe_bay.pdf



    Just to be clear here: do you blame all governments for all preventable deaths that occur in the NHS during the time they are in government?

    If so, you will agree that Shipman was the Tories' fault; as were the thousands who died as a result of the blood contamination scandal; as are all those who Jeremy Hunt has told us died last year unnecessarily.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 38,879
    JonathanD said:

    @Josias

    The Telegraph has more details on the CQC timeline

    "Roger Davidson lost his job as head of media and public affairs for the Care Quality Commission just before the 2010 general election — after telling how a quarter of NHS trusts had failed to meet basic hygiene standards.
    He was forced to sign a gagging order when he left and was told that the CQC was “railing against” his action to “highlight issues”."


    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/10137029/Speaking-out-cost-NHS-whistleblower-his-job.html

    Is that the Roger Davidson who is currently head of communications for NHS England. Looks like he was positively hounded out, doesn't it?

  • old_labourold_labour Posts: 3,238
    I must confess I had to consult Wikipedia to find out who David Jones is.
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    It depends on the action of the govt when dealing with the incident. Shipman was not endorsed by the conservative govt. There have been allegations concerning the govt response to the blood scandal though.

    The CQC does seem to have helped cover up the deaths in Morcombe. It is hard to see how it can recover from such an incident.

    I am sceptical about all these regulators. Not many function well it seems, just jobs for the boys (and girls) of the quango state.

    tim said:

    Scott_P said:

    Paywall

    Former health secretary Andy Burnham has denied accusations that he put pressure on the care watchdog in the run up to the 2010 election to tone down criticisms of an NHS trust where mothers and babies were dying.

    Mr Burnham faced questions over whether he had influenced the Care Quality Commission (CQC) at the time that it gave Morecambe Bay NHS Trust a clean bill of health despite a series of deaths at Furness General Hospital.
    Given that the CQC report giving Furness a clean bill of health happened when Lansley was Health Secretary do explain it to us Surge
    Do explain why you're trying to divert attention from the fact the deaths of mothers and babies occurred when Labour was in charge.

    Labour's NHS. Labour's deaths.

    As for you trying to blame Lansley for the CQC mess: an organisation set up by Labour, with Labour appointees in charge. The farcically incorrect report that gave the Morecombe trust an all-clear occurred at the changeover between the governments. Hardly Lansley's fault.
    April 2010: University Hospitals of Morecambe Bay NHS Trust given the all-clear by the health regulatory for England, the CQC.
    (2) Section 2.6 of (3) gives a definitive timeline.

    Also note:
    The Fielding review had presented its initial report (on 31 March 2010) but not its final report, when CQC registered UHMB without compliance conditions (on 1 April 2010).
    (3)

    In other words, a report that was highly critical of the trust was available when the CQC gave the trust a clean bill of health despite the existence of a highly critical report that allegedly they did not get to see until the next year.

    By all accounts, the inquiry into the CQC that was suppressed was an internal one. From Grant Thornton's report - section 1.17 of (3) :
    However, we did find evidence of the apparently deliberate suppression of an
    internal CQC report entitled "Summary of the internal review of the regulatory decisions and
    activity at UHMB", which was commissioned by senior management in October 2011
    Whether Lansley knew, or should have known, about it, is an interesting question that we should get to the bottom of. Lansley will have questions with regards to (1).

    However, these questions are minor compared to the ones Labour have to answer over what happened on their watch.

    Grant Thornton's report is well worth a read. It depicts an utter shambles, of people not knowing what was going on even in terms of investigations, yet alone with regards to clinical matters.

    (1): http://news.sky.com/story/1106964/lansley-was-warned-of-baby-deaths-in-2010 .
    (2): http://www.itv.com/news/update/2013-06-19/timeline-furness-hospital-scandal-and-cover-up/
    (3): http://www.cqc.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/documents/grant_thornton_uk_llp_morecambe_bay.pdf



    Just to be clear here: do you blame all governments for all preventable deaths that occur in the NHS during the time they are in government?

    If so, you will agree that Shipman was the Tories' fault; as were the thousands who died as a result of the blood contamination scandal; as are all those who Jeremy Hunt has told us died last year unnecessarily.

  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    Quincel said:

    Gove is very short given the circumstances, but how about Clegg at 12/1. Surely the only way he leaves the cabinet is in a leadership challenge or untimely death? 12/1 to be next?! Madness.

    Something called High Priest of Foreign Affairs in EU Land.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    @foxinsoxuk You should drop by the misnamed Old Man's Pub, which is close to you. They do very good Serbian food and it has a great atmosphere. Don't flirt with the very goodlooking barmaid, who is seeing the owner, who is one of Budapest's main gangsters.

    Take a look at Café New York, which is not too far away. The coffee is mediocre, but the building is amazing.

    Eat in one of the Jewish pastry shops in the area. Dohany is the high street of the Jewish district.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 38,879

    It depends on the action of the govt when dealing with the incident. Shipman was not endorsed by the conservative govt. There have been allegations concerning the govt response to the blood scandal though.

    The CQC does seem to have helped cover up the deaths in Morcombe. It is hard to see how it can recover from such an incident.

    I am sceptical about all these regulators. Not many function well it seems, just jobs for the boys (and girls) of the quango state.

    tim said:

    Scott_P said:

    Paywall

    Former health secretary Andy Burnham has denied accusations that he put pressure on the care watchdog in the run up to the 2010 election to tone down criticisms of an NHS trust where mothers and babies were dying.

    Mr Burnham faced questions over whether he had influenced the Care Quality Commission (CQC) at the time that it gave Morecambe Bay NHS Trust a clean bill of health despite a series of deaths at Furness General Hospital.
    Given that the CQC report giving Furness a clean bill of health happened when Lansley was Health Secretary do explain it to us Surge
    Do explain why you're trying to divert attention from the fact the deaths of mothers and babies occurred when Labour was in charge.

    Labour's NHS. Labour's deaths.

    As for you trying to blame Lansley for the CQC mess: an organisation set up by Labour, with Labour appointees in charge. The farcically incorrect report that gave the Morecombe trust an all-clear occurred at the changeover between the governments. Hardly Lansley's fault.
    April 2010: University Hospitals of Morecambe Bay NHS Trust given the all-clear by the health regulatory for England, the CQC.
    (2) Section 2.6 of (3) gives a definitive timeline.

    Also note:
    The Fielding review had presented its initial report (on 31 March 2010) but not its final report, when CQC registered UHMB without compliance conditions (on 1 April 2010).
    (3)

    In other words, a report that was highly critical of the trust was available when the CQC gave the trust a clean bill of health despite the existence of a highly critical report that allegedly they did not get to see until the next year.

    By all accounts, the inquiry into the CQC that was suppressed was an internal one. From Grant Thornton's report - section 1.17 of (3) :
    However, we did find evidence of the apparently deliberate suppression of an
    internal CQC report entitled "Summary of the internal review of the regulatory decisions and
    activity at UHMB", which was commissioned by senior management in October 2011
    Whether Lansley knew, or should have known, about it, is an interesting question that we should get to the bottom of. Lansley will have questions with regards to (1).

    However, these questions are minor compared to the ones Labour have to answer over what happened on their watch.

    Grant Thornton's report is well worth a read. It depicts an utter shambles, of people not knowing what was going on even in terms of investigations, yet alone with regards to clinical matters.

    (1): http://news.sky.com/story/1106964/lansley-was-warned-of-baby-deaths-in-2010 .
    (2): http://www.itv.com/news/update/2013-06-19/timeline-furness-hospital-scandal-and-cover-up/
    (3): http://www.cqc.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/documents/grant_thornton_uk_llp_morecambe_bay.pdf



    Just to be clear here: do you blame all governments for all preventable deaths that occur in the NHS during the time they are in government?

    If so, you will agree that Shipman was the Tories' fault; as were the thousands who died as a result of the blood contamination scandal; as are all those who Jeremy Hunt has told us died last year unnecessarily.



    Josias seems to be very clear: unnecessary deaths occurred during Labour's time in government, therefore they are Labour's fault.

    I am not sure how else you can read "Labour's NHS, Labour's deaths".


  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    Will EdM sack Andy Burnham before he sacks Ed Balls?

    Which is the greater liability?
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    edited June 2013
    This can only be good news for Andy Burnham...

    @politicshome
    Tomorrow's Sunday Telegraph front page: Speaking out cost NHS whistleblower his job polho.me/16pZmxN

    @politicshome
    Tomorrow's Mail on Sunday front page: NHS chief 'offered bribe to hush up death of my baby' polho.me/1c8FZdK
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    antifrank said:

    @foxinsoxuk You should drop by the misnamed Old Man's Pub, which is close to you. They do very good Serbian food and it has a great atmosphere. Don't flirt with the very goodlooking barmaid, who is seeing the owner, who is one of Budapest's main gangsters.

    Take a look at Café New York, which is not too far away. The coffee is mediocre, but the building is amazing.

    Eat in one of the Jewish pastry shops in the area. Dohany is the high street of the Jewish district.

    Part of my interest is to see some east European Jewish sites, so I expect we may eat in one of the pastry shops. Pubs may be out of bounds for the youngster, but sounds a place with interesting local colour!

  • JonathanDJonathanD Posts: 2,400
    @ScottP

    And all because poor Andy tried to be a hard man...

    "A vicious feud has broken out over a Labour-appointed peer who unexpectedly quit as head of an NHS watchdog at the centre of controversy over shocking hospital death rates.

    But her allies say she is the victim of a dirty-tricks campaign after a series of clashes with Health Secretary Andy Burnham.

    Mr Burnham is said to have repeatedly rejected her calls to improve the much-criticised system, which gave Basildon a 'good' rating just weeks before an unannounced inspection uncovered filthy wards and a high death rate.

    The furious rows are out of character for the normally mild-mannered Mr Burnham, who has recently been tipped as a contender to take over the Labour leadership from Gordon Brown. Some friends have advised him to 'toughen up' his image in preparation for a run at the job."


    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1233532/NHS-feud-hothead-Labour-baroness-accused-sending-colleagues-abusive-emails.html
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    tim said:

    Copy PB Tories still don't understand that the NHS issue was lost to their party when David Cameron used Ivan to gain trust but lied.

    The tragedy of Ivan Cameron is quite a different issue to complicity in covering up dysfunctional hospitals, apparently for political reasons.

    I trust no party with the NHS because of bitter experience.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,842
    tim said:

    Copy PB Tories still don't understand that the NHS issue was lost to their party when David Cameron used Ivan to gain trust but lied.

    You're a real charmer aren't you Tim.
  • RodCrosbyRodCrosby Posts: 7,737
    (LibDems) "insisting on PR for local government"
    I suggested that here months ago. The f*ckwits should have managed to extract it as the price of coalition in 2010, however...
  • JamesKellyJamesKelly Posts: 1,348
    'A warning to the No campaign'

    IF YOU were to mention to the average politically-interested Scot that there was a worrying new revelation about how Scottish pensions might be affected by constitutional change, chances are they would make the not-unreasonable assumption you were talking about independence.

    In fact, this weekend, that assumption would be wrong. As we reveal on our front page today, the new worry about pensions is linked to a constitutional change already agreed by Westminster to extend the powers of the Holyrood parliament, within the UK.

    The loophole we report today will – we are assured by the tax authorities – be closed before the new tartan tax powers pass formally to Holyrood. But it remains unclear what administrative changes may be necessary, both by HMRC and by private pension funds. It is also unclear how costly these changes may turn out to be, both for the government – and therefore the taxpayer – and for the private pension funds themselves. The irony of all this will not be lost to those who support a Yes vote in the independence referendum – it seems that staying in the Union causes uncertainty over pensions and could prove costly.


    http://www.scotsman.com/scotland-on-sunday/opinion/comment/leaders-a-warning-to-no-campaign-taking-a-stand-1-2973865
  • fitalassfitalass Posts: 4,279
    Toby Helm in the Guardian - Osborne's cuts will shape the economy – and the future role of the state

    "Looking for cash: chancellor George Osborne. Photograph: Luke Macgregor/Reuters

    Recent political history is full of stories of ministers falling out over public spending. David Blunkett recalled in his memoirs how he "threatened violence" against the chief secretary to the Treasury in 2001 in a battle over cash. "I got hold of Paul Boateng's lapels on the way out of Gordon Brown's office … my fuse blew," he wrote.

    Almost every year Brown, when chancellor, refused to tell Tony Blair what was in his budget until it was too late for No 10 to object. One year Blair became so angry that he called in John Prescott, who told Brown: "He's the fucking prime minister – you've got to tell him what is in the budget."

    When future memoirs record the runup to Wednesday's spending review, more tales of blown fuses will no doubt be added to the list. This weekend the business secretary, Vince Cable, is involved in what are being described as "epic rows" over how much will be cut, and what will be left for capital spending, in his Department for Business, Innovation and Skills. Osborne is looking for £11.5bn of cuts for 2015-16 from all of government as he tries to balance the books by 2018.

    Cable is digging in, demanding enough capital spending to be able to justify saying that growth is his priority, while most others in cabinet were said to be close to reaching – or to have reached – agreement on Saturday night. Along the way, arguments have raged between Tories and Liberal Democrats over priorities. While Whitehall has kept the lid on leaks this time, following the "omnishambles" last year, behind closed doors things have been more problematic and some say even more tense than is normal, for two reasons."
  • MikeSmithsonMikeSmithson Posts: 7,382
    edited June 2013
    Tim. That is a very serious allegation against Cameron.


    Substantiate or it will be deleted.
    tim said:

    Copy PB Tories still don't understand that the NHS issue was lost to their party when David Cameron used Ivan to gain trust but lied.

  • john_zimsjohn_zims Posts: 3,399
    edited June 2013
    @Scott_P

    'This can only be good news for Andy Burnham.'

    He'll just go back into hiding.
  • GeoffMGeoffM Posts: 6,071
    RodCrosby said:

    (LibDems) "insisting on PR for local government" I suggested that here months ago. The f*ckwits should have managed to extract it as the price of coalition in 2010, however...

    All Hail the Tedious Sage-In-His-Own-Lunchtime Crosby. You aren't related to Vince Cable, are you?

  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 26,286
    "Riot after Chinese teachers try to stop pupils cheating

    What should have been a hushed scene of 800 Chinese students diligently sitting their university entrance exams erupted into siege warfare after invigilators tried to stop them from cheating."

    "'We want fairness. There is no fairness if you do not let us cheat.'"
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/china/10132391/Riot-after-Chinese-teachers-try-to-stop-pupils-cheating.html
  • redcliffe62redcliffe62 Posts: 342
    Charles said:

    isam said:

    Prince Peter
    Princess Olive
    Princess Valerie
    Princess Doroty
    Princess Constance
    Princess Edith

    Any major reasons why these could be a no no?

    Windors tend to stick to family names
    Prince Wilhelm it is then.............
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 38,519

    It depends on the action of the govt when dealing with the incident. Shipman was not endorsed by the conservative govt. There have been allegations concerning the govt response to the blood scandal though.

    The CQC does seem to have helped cover up the deaths in Morcombe. It is hard to see how it can recover from such an incident.

    I am sceptical about all these regulators. Not many function well it seems, just jobs for the boys (and girls) of the quango state.

    tim said:

    Scott_P said:

    Paywall

    Former health secretary Andy Burnham has denied accusations that he put pressure on the care watchdog in the run up to the 2010 election to tone down criticisms of an NHS trust where mothers and babies were dying.

    Mr Burnham faced questions over whether he had influenced the Care Quality Commission (CQC) at the time that it gave Morecambe Bay NHS Trust a clean bill of health despite a series of deaths at Furness General Hospital.
    Given that the CQC report giving Furness a clean bill of health happened when Lansley was Health Secretary do explain it to us Surge
    Do explain why you're trying to divert attention from the fact the deaths of mothers and babies occurred when Labour was in charge.

    Labour's NHS. Labour's deaths.

    As for you trying to blame Lansley for the CQC mess: an organisation set up by Labour, with Labour appointees in charge. The farcically incorrect report that gave the Morecombe trust an all-clear occurred at the changeover between the governments. Hardly Lansley's fault.
    April 2010: University Hospitals of Morecambe Bay NHS Trust given the all-clear by the health regulatory for England, the CQC.
    (2) Section 2.6 of (3) gives a definitive timeline.

    Also note:
    The Fielding review had presented its initial report (on 31 March 2010) but not its final report, when CQC registered UHMB without compliance conditions (on 1 April 2010).
    (3)

    In other words, a report that was highly critical of the trust was available when the CQC gave the trust a clean bill of health despite the existence of a highly critical report that allegedly they did not get to see until the next year.

    By all accounts, the inquiry into the CQC that was suppressed was an internal one. From Grant Thornton's report - section 1.17 of (3) :
    However, we did find evidence of the apparently deliberate suppression of an
    internal CQC report entitled "Summary of the internal review of the regulatory decisions and
    activity at UHMB", which was commissioned by senior management in October 2011
    Whether Lansley knew, or should have known, about it, is an interesting question that we should get to the bottom of. Lansley will have questions with regards to (1).

    However, these questions are minor compared to the ones Labour have to answer over what happened on their watch.

    Grant Thornton's report is well worth a read. It depicts an utter shambles, of people not knowing what was going on even in terms of investigations, yet alone with regards to clinical matters.

    (1): http://news.sky.com/story/1106964/lansley-was-warned-of-baby-deaths-in-2010 .
    (2): http://www.itv.com/news/update/2013-06-19/timeline-furness-hospital-scandal-and-cover-up/
    (3): http://www.cqc.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/documents/grant_thornton_uk_llp_morecambe_bay.pdf



    Just to be clear here: do you blame all governments for all preventable deaths that occur in the NHS during the time they are in government?

    If so, you will agree that Shipman was the Tories' fault; as were the thousands who died as a result of the blood contamination scandal; as are all those who Jeremy Hunt has told us died last year unnecessarily.



    Josias seems to be very clear: unnecessary deaths occurred during Labour's time in government, therefore they are Labour's fault.

    I am not sure how else you can read "Labour's NHS, Labour's deaths".


    You cannot read it differently if you use the sentence out of context. You can read it differently if you read it in the context of what happened at Stafford, Furness and the CQC, as was happening in my post. Especially when I was replying to Tim, who seemed to want to put this on Lansley and whitewash out any involvement that Labour may have had. That whitewashing also involves ignoring the deaths of mothers and children, which is how the mess occurred in the first place.

    So I will explain it to you simply.

    In Stafford, and at Furness, we had people dying unnecessarily. I know some on here are desperately trying to say 'possibly one' died at Stafford, but I think they can safely be ignored as nutjobs.

    I have also repeatedly said that similar deaths will almost certainly occur under this government. Mistakes happen in any organisation, and that is certainly true in one as large as the NHS, which deals with a system as complex and poorly understood as the human body. If only half of one percent of nurses, doctors and surgeons are incompetent, then there will be thousands of such incompetents within the NHS. (There will also be thousands of brilliant staff as well at the other end of the scale.)

    What matters is how such incidents are responded to. What should happen is that procedures are put in place to detect the problems, preferably early, and when they are spotted they should be investigated. If the investigation shows wrongdoing, then the person doing the wrong should be either sacked or retrained. Ideally there will be warning signs that can be detected before anyone come to harm.

    However, in those two cases some interesting things happened. When it became clear that there were problems, the first reaction (at Stafford and CQC) was to try to cover up and pretend everything was fine. In the case of Furness, a separate cover-up went as far as the regulator.

    In the meantime, people remained at risk. In both cases, deaths continued to occur. The reputation of the CQC and the hospitals was safe, but patients were not. There was a cover-up culture.

    As Labour had been running the NHS for some years and were repeatedly telling us that it was brilliant, it is safe to assume that either this culture developed under Labour, or was certainly not prevented. Certainly no-one has been able to say why the pay-offs to whistleblowers by the NHS was in the best interests of patients.

    Add in the way people who have tried to whistleblow have allegedly been sacked, and the way relatives have been branded 'loudmouths' for trying to get to the truth, and you can see a culture within Labour that cares more for the NHS than it does for the patients within.

    So no, I am not talking about all unnecessary deaths. But the culture that allowed Stafford, Furness and the CQC scandals to occur means that those deaths can, in my opinion, be laid firmly at Labour's door.

    Or do you blame the Tories for them?
  • FinancierFinancier Posts: 3,916
    Latest YouGov / The Sunday Times results 21st June - CON 31%, LAB 39%, LD 10%, UKIP 13%; APP -31 - See more at: http://yougov.co.uk/news/2013/06/23/update-labour-lead-8/#sthash.scOwPNBg.dpuf
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,263
    YG Sunday CON 31%, LAB 39%, LD 10%, UKIP 13%; APP -31. Dave's net ratings up +7, Miliband +2, Clegg n/c, NHS not trusted not to cover up, but 60% know nobody who has complained of poor treatment; NHS worse in last 3 years (46 worse, 4 better, 36 n/c), Gove doing poor job 49-22, British schools worse than other countries, universities better but poor value for money. No very obvious trends overall.

    http://cdn.yougov.com/cumulus_uploads/document/m4pxoy7gza/YG-Archive-Pol-Sunday-Times-results-210613.pdf
  • FinancierFinancier Posts: 3,916
    edited June 2013
    YouGov

    Leaders on Well/Badly

    Cameron: -18 (+7)
    Miliband: -33(+2)
    Clegg: -52 (0)

    Coalition -33(+2)

  • FinancierFinancier Posts: 3,916
    YouGov

    How do you think the financial situation of your
    household will change over the next 12 months?

    Better: 14 (+2)
    Worse: 44 (-3)

    To what extent, if at all, do you trust the NHS to
    be open and honest about its services and
    standards of care?

    Trust: 32(-9)
    Do Not Trust: 58 (+7)

    Thinking about recent stories of NHS trusts and
    regulators covering up poor performance, how
    confident are you that rules will be put in place
    to prevent cover-ups in the future?

    Confident: 26
    Not Confident: 65

    If NHS or regulator staff are found to have
    covered up errors in hospital performance do
    you think they should...
    Be sacked from their jobs?

    Should: 88
    Should not; 4

    Be Stripped of Pension Rights:

    Should: 54
    Should Not: 27

    Face Criminal Prosecution

    Should: 71
    Should Not 11


  • FinancierFinancier Posts: 3,916
    YouGov

    Thinking about grammar schools and schools
    that select pupils by ability, which of the
    following best reflects your views?

    The government should encourage more schools to
    select by academic ability and build more grammar
    schools: 43

    The government should retain the existing grammar
    schools, but should not allow more selective
    schools or new grammar schools to be built: 19

    The government should stop schools selecting by
    academic ability and the existing grammar schools
    should be opened to children of all abilities: 20

    Not sure: 18
This discussion has been closed.