Donate SIGN UP

Answers

21 to 40 of 41rss feed

First Previous 1 2 3 Next Last

Avatar Image
“I am no fan, but the statement that the CBI and NHS should be listened to makes clear sense on this issue.” Does it? I don’t think so. Dealing firstly with the NHS, that organisation is one of the most inefficient and badly managed of any large organisation in the UK, possibly in Europe. Its bosses preside over enormous levels of waste, stupendous...
20:17 Sun 17th Dec 2017
"TTT...it can take years to train Nurses and such like. " - which is why we should hire the fully trained ones from the agencies, give them proper full time, well paid jobs instead of paying their employers a gazillion pounds whilst they are exploited, hire them directly. Crikey I sound like a socialist! Mikey I'd have thought you'd welcome this.
That isn't the point, Mikey. The more people willing and able to do a job, the less the price will be. It's just basic supply and demand.
Pixie....all Nurses are paid the same. The business of agency nurses needs to be looked at, of that I agree.
That isn't what I said, Mikey. The bigger thr pool is to choose from, the less you end up paying. It's basic school Economics.
“I am no fan, but the statement that the CBI and NHS should be listened to makes clear sense on this issue.”

Does it? I don’t think so.

Dealing firstly with the NHS, that organisation is one of the most inefficient and badly managed of any large organisation in the UK, possibly in Europe. Its bosses preside over enormous levels of waste, stupendous inefficiency and just plain bad management. Many of its ills relate to this, not lack of funds or difficulties recruiting staff.

The CBI is a very useful organisation. Directors and senior managers are well advised to pay careful attention to its recommendations – and promptly do the exact opposite. They have plenty of form on major issues: they virtually forced the government to join the ill-fated Exchange Rate Mechanism with disastrous results leading to a severe recession. They pleaded with the government to abolish the pound and join the euro, warning that the City would suffer if we did not. We didn’t; the City thrived; the euro nearly went under (causing huge and continuing hardship across much of Europe as the price for its survival). It has been wrong on its views on nationalisation and other State control. Its view on Brexit is that it fears a “cliff edge” departure from the EU, instead favouring a “transition period” which it would hope to become permanent. It is wrong again. A swift and sure exit is required then we can all move on instead of being held in purgatory for an undefined period.
NJ....Mrs May pleaded for a transition period, when she had her Awayday to Florence a few months ago. And it looks as if the EU have now agreed with her.
The big driver behind the last Labour Government not putting any restriction on eastern Eropean immigration was business.
Blair/Brown were so far up the CBI’s backside, that they would yeild to the CBIs demands. And the CBI definitely wanted cheap Labour, so they were allowed to come here in their millions.

Ironically, it was the stealing of low paid jobs by European immigranrs in Labour’s heartlands that won the Brexit vote.

So no, we should not listen to the terminally befuddled Abbott, or the self interested CBI, we shouldtell them both to F*** off.
The really REALLY important thing to take from any article about Diane Abbott is that, if Labour won an election tomorrow she would be Home Secretary.
Sorry if that's going to give a few restless nights for anyone who's ever tried to follow any statement she ever made.
Ever.

I have an image in my head of all the old passed over left wingers from New Labour days sitting around bomb banning, Mugabe supporting, terrorist backing and generally navel gazing with not a clue what to do about anything that actually matters to this country.

See, now I have Abbott's navel in my mind. I'm off to drink salty water to see if it helps my predicament.
Love the last two posts ... One fully expected and the other a surprise but both worthy of BA's
douglas: "The really REALLY important thing to take from any article about Diane Abbott is that, if Labour won an election tomorrow she would be Home Secretary. " - what's really REALLY REALLY REALLY terrifying is that even with that knowledge people like mikey still vote Labour!
Question Author
ttt
the mind boggles at the very idea..
Speaking of mathmatically challenged Home Secretary’s, May promised to bring immigration down to the tens of thousands, and then she let it rocket to 320,000.
Not an endorsement of Abbott, but the last two conservative (female) Home Secretarys haven’t been much cop either.
Having had the misfortune to spend six spells in hospital this year I have learnt a few things.

1. The majority of 'nurses' in hospitals are not nurses at all, they are 'nursing assistants', with the same level of training as 'care assistants', who work in care homes or in the community.

2.Most of them prefer to work via an agency because
a) They are paid more
b) They can pick and choose their shifts, when and where to work.
c) They are not allowed to perform the simplest tasks which would routinely be undertaken by a qualified nurse. They are reduced to basic things like changing bedding and wiping backsides.

Whether they choose to work in hospitals, care homes or people's own homes, they are hired through an agency or 'bank', as they call it.

I agree that there are serious problems in hospitals or the 'care' industry which should urgently be addressed.

My information came from a young lady who looked after me and spilled the beans.
Why would anyone even consider listening to Diane Abbott? Who could possibly take her seriously?
Dash it , my reply appears in the BA box for all the wrong reasons.

Ask my window cleaner instead, she seems to know most things.
Mostly she seems to be gibbering. Saying the electorate should vote on the deal then claiming that meant parliament. That's a fudge worthy of May.

She indicates issues with employers of foreign labour, but they've been given two years to sort out their employment policy and potential issues. Maybe they need to design a system for ensuring they get visas as needed.
Mamyalynne, ??

Your reply isn't in the Best Answer box.
"..... Who could possibly take her seriously? - well those that voted Labour last time are presumably happy to have a MAABOF woman as Home sec!
NJ has quoted my reply and trashed it, which is fine - my words appear that's all.
Oh .... right.

21 to 40 of 41rss feed

First Previous 1 2 3 Next Last

Do you know the answer?

Is She Right

Answer Question >>