YouGov Poll - 33 Point lead!

What Stretting is referring to as doctors being gatekeepers is what’s called the single point of access. The problem is some areas have self referrals already in place for things like physio which is what he and Starmer are referring to

Let’s put it this way if a patient needs a new hip and an online referral is sent in you’re already legally responsible for that persons medical care. Secondary care won’t accept those referrals NOW without the patient being seen and a pharmacist is never going to have patients. They’re just not, nor are they going to be able to be qualified to do any investigation work such as XRs for the patient that secondary care may request before accepting the referral

They can say see a Doctor or Physio which happens now which means we’re actually not getting anywhere with pharmacists being a solution to the problems in the NHS
Doctors still can be gatekeepers, but they don't need to be gatekeepers for all of it, and the aspects they do, some of that could be done online to streamline the process.

I'm not saying for a pharmacist to have a register of patients, I'm saying anyone should be able to go there for very basic care, anyone from any area to any pharmacist who signs up for it, and if it's treatable with basic care, treat them, give them some drugs and send them on their way. Put the liability on the patient, I'd happily take liability if I thought my problem was basic, if it meant easy in/ out. If I thought I had a big problem I'd go to the GP, or ideally someone who specialises in my problem, or a department which covers it.

Nobody is saying send someone who needs a new hip to a pharmacist, but equally, maybe they don't need to be seeing a GP if they're old and know they have a hip problem, things like that are so common we could have someone dedicated to that role alone, bypass the GP, or people just go to a department handling that and wait (straight to musculoskeletal, X-Ray dept or whatever). Same with many other things.

The system just doesn't work (as well as it could, even with low manpower), but it's just as much a policy, high-level management, organisational and waste problem as it is a staffing problem for those on the front line. It's also an education problem for the public, most don't know where to go for what, so go to the wrong place, taking up resources and appointments from people who went to the right place.

Here's one recent example (I've got a few). I had an impact injury to the outside of my knee, which for some reason caused foot problems, which was odd, rang 111, got passed onto someone else and within an hour I'd spoken to a specialist over the phone who talked me through some tests and said I've almost certainly got nerve damage, and need to get an MRI and see a knee & never specialist ASAP, but need to start via GP. 1 year later after getting passed around from the GP, physio and other areas (maybe 20 appointments, loads of drugs and various equipment), I finally got to see the knee & nerve specialist and it was confirmed I needed that MRI and some nerve tests and they would arrange an appointment. For some reason that never happened over the next year, and I got a call asking if I had my MRI, said no and the specialist went banana's (not at me, at their systems). Had the MRI the next week, the damage was confirmed, yet hadn't been treated for two years. It made the whole thing a waste of time and resources. I should have just been put straight on the MRI list. I'd have even went at 3am out of hours, or driven 100 miles for it, and done away with most of the 20 appointments in between. Almost every appointment said this isn't my speciality, and was all about dealing with the symptoms, not the cause. I feel guilty for how many resources I took up, by going to the wrong place over and over, before they let me go and see the person I knew I needed to see on day 1.
 
Doctors still can be gatekeepers, but they don't need to be gatekeepers for all of it, and the aspects they do, some of that could be done online to streamline the process.

I'm not saying for a pharmacist to have a register of patients, I'm saying anyone should be able to go there for very basic care, anyone from any area to any pharmacist who signs up for it, and if it's treatable with basic care, treat them, give them some drugs and send them on their way. Put the liability on the patient, I'd happily take liability if I thought my problem was basic, if it meant easy in/ out. If I thought I had a big problem I'd go to the GP, or ideally someone who specialises in my problem, or a department which covers it.

Nobody is saying send someone who needs a new hip to a pharmacist, but equally, maybe they don't need to be seeing a GP if they're old and know they have a hip problem, things like that are so common we could have someone dedicated to that role alone, bypass the GP, or people just go to a department handling that and wait (straight to musculoskeletal, X-Ray dept or whatever). Same with many other things.

The system just doesn't work (as well as it could, even with low manpower), but it's just as much a policy, high-level management, organisational and waste problem as it is a staffing problem for those on the front line. It's also an education problem for the public, most don't know where to go for what, so go to the wrong place, taking up resources and appointments from people who went to the right place.

Here's one recent example (I've got a few). I had an impact injury to the outside of my knee, which for some reason caused foot problems, which was odd, rang 111, got passed onto someone else and within an hour I'd spoken to a specialist over the phone who talked me through some tests and said I've almost certainly got nerve damage, and need to get an MRI and see a knee & never specialist ASAP, but need to start via GP. 1 year later after getting passed around from the GP, physio and other areas (maybe 20 appointments, loads of drugs and various equipment), I finally got to see the knee & nerve specialist and it was confirmed I needed that MRI and some nerve tests and they would arrange an appointment. For some reason that never happened over the next year, and I got a call asking if I had my MRI, said no and the specialist went banana's (not at me, at their systems). Had the MRI the next week, the damage was confirmed, yet hadn't been treated for two years. It made the whole thing a waste of time and resources. I should have just been put straight on the MRI list. I'd have even went at 3am out of hours, or driven 100 miles for it, and done away with most of the 20 appointments in between. Almost every appointment said this isn't my speciality, and was all about dealing with the symptoms, not the cause. I feel guilty for how many resources I took up, by going to the wrong place over and over, before they let me go and see the person I knew I needed to see on day 1.
More emphasis and resources should be put into preventative measures - you touched on education above. Start with schoolchildren - teach them how to stay healthy.
 
Of course, the idea would be to increase the number of pharmacists, which I expect is easier than adding more GP's, and still crippling them with issues which could be solved with much simpler care/ treatment.

There are issues with everything, the NHS has thousands, if this adds 20 issues and saves 100 then that's a positive.

You have to be open to change, we're using a similar system to what we always have, and it's not really modernised, where there's clearly the ability to do that for some appintments.
237 pharmacists to close
 
237 pharmacists to close
FFS, good old Tories, doing what they can to wreck the place even more.

Not the only partial solution mind, it would just make sense for them to take more on if they had the space to do it, but maybe we could start some nationalised pharmacies in their place.
 
It wouldn't be a surprise to see the polls widening after zahawi tax dodging, Johnson scrounging the home office culpable in child trafficking and Johnson and/or sunak allowing Russians who were apparently sanctioned to bypass those sanctions.
 
It wouldn't be a surprise to see the polls widening after zahawi tax dodging, Johnson scrounging the home office culpable in child trafficking and Johnson and/or sunak allowing Russians who were apparently sanctioned to bypass those sanctions.
It's mad how they keep finding new floors to break through.

I keep saying it but my only concern is that their approval is now so low, that it's just the optimal time to get any bad news out of the way, as there's surely nobody else left who would ever consider voting for someone else.

Hopefully this is a lesson to them, that you can't let even further right, inept, clowns into office, and they slacken off this approach.

I'm not even sure now that I want them to carry on with further destruction as it could completely destroy them, and they could then end up splitting in half, where two separate entities (who could still work together as a coalition) could end up getting more votes than one single would. I doubt they would win many seats doing the latter mind, as they would effectively end up killing each other if they stood in the same seats.
 
If the party fractures it will be a generation before the conservatives get voted in again. The Erg have, effectively destroyed the party. I don't care for the conservatives policies but with fptp you really need a realistic opposition otherwise the party in power can do what it likes.

I am not sure what sunaks game is here. Just to say he was pm I suppose. I can't see how they can be turned around whilst they are beholden to the erg.
 
If the party fractures it will be a generation before the conservatives get voted in again. The Erg have, effectively destroyed the party. I don't care for the conservatives policies but with fptp you really need a realistic opposition otherwise the party in power can do what it likes.

I am not sure what sunaks game is here. Just to say he was pm I suppose. I can't see how they can be turned around whilst they are beholden to the erg.
Yeah I think that's what one of the main problems has been, loads of Tory's voted Tory and loads of LEavers voted Tory, so the result of that was 365 seats and them thinking they could do what they liked, and the far right driving the ship. No wonder it's ended up in probably the biggest cluster **** I've ever known since being able to vote.

Sunak knows he's beat, so is just trying to bluff his way through the hand and hope he hits gold somehow later down the line, but it's unlikely. He'll gradually distance himself from those who have helped create this mess, probably more so after 2025 if he can stay as Tory leader. It will be easier for him then too, as most of them will lose their seats, or face a challenge. Sunak's not as bad as the rest of them, but that's not praise, it just means he's less bad, and he's nothing like the common man, or 99.9% of voters. Wouldn't be surprised if he does a few things which will make Labour's job harder for the next term, his eyes will probably be on 2030, but they'll probably kick him out by then.

He could end up being Tory leader for the biggest kicking they've every had, and having that happen to him as PM, crazy. 95% of that damage is caused by those around him and those preceding him I think, but he seemingly didn't do much to stop it either.
 
Yeah I think that's what one of the main problems has been, loads of Tory's voted Tory and loads of LEavers voted Tory, so the result of that was 365 seats and them thinking they could do what they liked, and the far right driving the ship. No wonder it's ended up in probably the biggest cluster **** I've ever known since being able to vote.

Sunak knows he's beat, so is just trying to bluff his way through the hand and hope he hits gold somehow later down the line, but it's unlikely. He'll gradually distance himself from those who have helped create this mess, probably more so after 2025 if he can stay as Tory leader. It will be easier for him then too, as most of them will lose their seats, or face a challenge. Sunak's not as bad as the rest of them, but that's not praise, it just means he's less bad, and he's nothing like the common man, or 99.9% of voters. Wouldn't be surprised if he does a few things which will make Labour's job harder for the next term, his eyes will probably be on 2030, but they'll probably kick him out by then.

He could end up being Tory leader for the biggest kicking they've every had, and having that happen to him as PM, crazy. 95% of that damage is caused by those around him and those preceding him I think, but he seemingly didn't do much to stop it either.
I think he‘s trapped. They didn’t want him, they voted for Truss and the IMF no doubt told the 1922 that she had to go straight away.

No sympathy for Rishi though half the problems are his own from the lockdown cash splash.
 
I think he‘s trapped. They didn’t want him, they voted for Truss and the IMF no doubt told the 1922 that she had to go straight away.

No sympathy for Rishi though half the problems are his own from the lockdown cash splash.
Yeah, for sure, he's 100% trapped, all of the Tories are in a way, and it's an unwinnable hand from here, they're in the deepest of holes, which they collectively dug in an unsafe manner.

The only way to possibly climb out of the hole is to use the ladder (much closer EU ties, allowing freedom of movement etc, to boost the economy), but 3/4 of his party would rather saw the ladder in half if he tried to climb it.

I think the furlough system was the right thing to do, or a version of it, but maybe we could have got better value. Who knows, it's a tough one, and I've not thought back much about that retrospectively, as it never really impacted my trade/ business/ sector (construction/ utilities). It did help keep other businesses afloat, and with trained staff to return to them.

Don't really blame them for track and trace, it was necessary but we got robbed on the price. Same with the PPE, don't mind them buying that from wherever they could get their hands on it, and any which was found short of healthcare spec should have been handed out FOC with a disclaimer. They shouldn't have been giving contracts to their mates though, who were not PPE companies, they should have tried to recover the costs on that, or people should have been held responsible. I understand that they were acting quickly mind, and under major pressure, which should give some leeway, but nowhere near what leeway they came out with.
 
If the party fractures it will be a generation before the conservatives get voted in again. The Erg have, effectively destroyed the party. I don't care for the conservatives policies but with fptp you really need a realistic opposition otherwise the party in power can do what it likes.

I am not sure what sunaks game is here. Just to say he was pm I suppose. I can't see how they can be turned around whilst they are beholden to the erg.
Well my preferred solution would be to bin off FPTP.

But failing that, agree you need a realistic opposition but there's nothing "realistic" about the Tories in their current form (I know it's not how you meant it).

Wouldn't be the worst thing in the world to see the Tories in their current guise utterly destroyed as long as what replaces them is more grown up and competent.

A party that would give us proper grown up debate in our politics as opposed to the pathetic playground stuff we have to tolerate most of the time now.

Lib Dems maybe not to the right enough to plug the gap? Would like to see them as a strong opposition but probably won't be able to pick up enough non labour voters.
 
Well my preferred solution would be to bin off FPTP.

But failing that, agree you need a realistic opposition but there's nothing "realistic" about the Tories in their current form (I know it's not how you meant it).

Wouldn't be the worst thing in the world to see the Tories in their current guise utterly destroyed as long as what replaces them is more grown up and competent.

A party that would give us proper grown up debate in our politics as opposed to the pathetic playground stuff we have to tolerate most of the time now.

Lib Dems maybe not to the right enough to plug the gap? Would like to see them as a strong opposition but probably won't be able to pick up enough non labour voters.
The lib dems have traditionally shared the Labour center ground I think. We may not like center right politics but it is a valid political ideology that many favour.

You are right the current tory party are very close to destroying the uk and the union its founded on. They aren't really traditional conservatives though.

I also agree it wouldn't be a bad thing if the tories had to start from scratch and it took a decade for them to be a force again.

Hopefully the extreme right will splinter and take the extreme voters with them.
 
Intersting chat on Peston last night with John Curtice, the polling expert.

As the Tories have burnt pretty much everyone in Parliament they would be unable to form a minority Government with anyone so effectively they need to add about 8 points on to their vote share on top of drawing level with Labour to form a Government - so even with a 20 point deficit they really need 30 to win.

Labour on the other hand could gain power with a poll loss.

It's really bad news for the Tories.
 
If they had a shred of decency or even dignity they'd call a general election and end this debacle.

They've lost control and it's clear as day they have no idea how to fix any of the problems, most of their own making.

It's also increasingly obvious a significant majority of the electorate want them gone too.

Sunak can't govern, he's weak and his party is splintered. He's not really in charge, he's just a figurehead for the sham government. Even if he had any original thoughts (he doesn't) he'd never be able to implement them because he'd never be able to get enough of his MPs to agree. A worrying number seem to think they're actually in UKIP (or worse).

Most ministers seem to be just leaning into the fact were pretty much just a Kleptocracy now.
 
Intersting chat on Peston last night with John Curtice, the polling expert.

As the Tories have burnt pretty much everyone in Parliament they would be unable to form a minority Government with anyone so effectively they need to add about 8 points on to their vote share on top of drawing level with Labour to form a Government - so even with a 20 point deficit they really need 30 to win.

Labour on the other hand could gain power with a poll loss.

It's really bad news for the Tories.
They really are dead in the water. How do the advisors of Sunak think defending a multi millionaire tax avoider shores up votes. Or a serial bully who everyone thinks is a dimwit at best anyway?

Tied to a hard Brexit, that most of the population has now concluded is a disaster, by a handful of party loons.

And "but Corbyn", their only fall back after 13 disastrous years is not working. Whatever people on the left and others misgivings over Starmer, being a Corbynista is not one of them!

A clueless Government that has ran out of whatever ideas and steam they had in the 1st place.
 
Back
Top