How can it be said that a particular commentator, scrutinising the local NHS management is showing a complete lack of knowledge with relation to roles and responsibilities and a duty of care within the NHS? How is the counter argument justified? By simply by stating it as a given.
The point is that the local NHS executive has been set up to represent the Government position and manage it like a business. This is left out of the false logic of the opposition’s thinking, it is not objectively based but a sleight of hand to dismiss the origin of such ideas eminating from the Public centred thinking.
The buildings for sale at St Mary’s Hospital for example, have been discussed, even up to the point of being part of public assets and Government and Conservative intentions to sell off land and buildings as they do with all local authority buildings. It is ideologically led and is part of the privatisation programme.
To see the standpoint of one commentator is easy enough, it is the standpoint of capital centred economics and neo-liberal privatisation at that.
The standpoint of NHS workers who stood on their picket lines recently is the opposite.
This standpoint was clear and they talked freely about their experience of the use of these buildings. It was also discussed fruitfully at the recent Public Meeting on the privatisation of the NHS. It was clear that capacity was there for use.
The question of costs is another misunderstood context for funding. The current executive, in its actions on staffing has decided, wrongly that labour is a cost, disregarding that it adds value. It wants to argue efficiency and productivity as if the NHS should be considered like a profit making business. This misapprehension is wrong too.
The NHS should not necessarily, along with other social programmes, be treated as profit based enterprises instead they should be seen as Public Services.
The funding required for the NHS nationally has been estimated at £13bn otherwise it will start to collapse. Even the Labour Party wants only to provide £2.5bn. Why is Austerity taking precedence by all cartel political parties?
It was after 1945, the last austere situation that Britain faced, that investment in Social programmes were put in place and helped to secure the necessary growth needed at the time.
The ideologically driven arguments provided by capital centred economics are beholden to the business oriented myth. Buildings ‘Not fit for purpose’ is conjecture spread by the ones ‘in the know’ that only business executives and supremos know the answer to utilisation of assets. Are these not assets utilised effectively for similar purpose in the past? Is not the proximity to St Mary’s and its locality the best-placed space? The problem with these pragmatic arguments is that they in fact do not hold water, they are sleight of hand remarks that are of no use. And what are these arguments about energy costs? Do other buildings elsewhere not have heating costs at St Mary’s or elsewhere? Are these kinds of arguments credible or should we remove funding from elsewhere on the basis of heating provision? Is this serious argument?
Who says the buildings are unsafe? Some of the refurbished buildings had safety issues in the past, they were made safe and they were modernised and equipped. The issue is whether you want them or not.
Solent Grange wasn’t just a short-term measure to get over the dire situation that has occurred this winter as stated. It was chosen for a purpose. The ideological motivation was for a place in the private sector. This why the question was raised about the use of this place and its organisation in the first place.
Arguing that the funding within the NHS has changed with money being allocated to the CCG to the detriment of the local NHS and St Mary’s is starting to take up the issue of what is happening to our NHS from the people’s perspective and their pro-social interests.
‘Knocking’ individuals like CEO’s or managers is neither the point nor the intention. The problem is seeing what these executives do in the world and the way these leaderships and decision-makers in the NHS are tools to carry out the privatisation programme. How the new structures, like CCG’s instead of the previous PCT’s, have become ideologised mechanisms to take the NHS in a different direction.
The whole point is to decide where decision-making lies and where it should be. The decision-makers should lie with the public that supports the NHS and not the privateers.