Friday, February 17, 2012

Who is invited to discuss the future of the NHS with the government?

Color me less than surprised.

Science Blogger Ben Goldacre says,

I've put the main players into a table, to see if the invitation list it tells a story. Let me know if you think it does: I'm still not sure what statistical methods would be best to analyse this data, and extract the signal from the noise?



I can't work it out Ben. Are you seeing something in this data that is supposed to tell us something?




6 comments:

Bruv said...

Hi Sis

Yup that's how it goes in the UK at the moment, serious discussions on changing the greatest asset the UK has and what happens?

The global "consultation" seems to be based on only the people who agree with the proposals and don't bother opening your mouth if you disagree, because we won't be listening.

By the way Chris has just been told she is redundant from 2nd April, due to the Local Govt cuts, only 3 months after the section she manages was awarded a National award and she is consulted nationally by other LG authorities wishing to emulate them. I think that sums up the situation in the UK.

Plus Cameron is a wanker from a priviliged family, married to someone from another very wealthy family and yet the hypocrite leans on the protrayal of him as honest working class "Dave"!!

Bruv

Bruv said...

Hi Sis

As a sign of his democratic principles David Cameron has announced today that he "as no intention of having a meeting with the parties that disagree with the NHS reforms".

I think that sums this government up nicely.

Bruv

Mike said...

I suggest the whole purpose of this 'consultation' is to ask the bill's supporters how best to spin the bill to the electorate. The purpose of the earlier 'listening exercise' was to prevent the bill's discussion in Parliament (by suspending discussion until the recess). (The Tories are the most successful party at passing legislation, by foul means.) Naturally, there's a revolving door with redundant civil servants leaving and contractors & consultants entering. The new privatised state will be far more expensive than the old.

All eyes on Vermont's single-payer health care system, cutting out the insurance companies. (Supposedly, Vermont and Oregon are the two most left-leaning States.)

Bruv said...

Hi Sis

Mike it is even more devious than "redundant civil servants leaving and contractors & consultants entering" I worked for a major national electricity transmission utility, over 14 years they went through 5 re-organisations, which under normal circumastances you would say that showed that the cretins couldn't get it right and were constantly re-jigging things. In fact the opposite was true and the reason they went through so many reorganisations was that the directors bonuses were based on cutting OPEX costs. So each reorganisation another 10% of staff was deemed unecessary thereby cutting OPEX and therefore cost(that doesn't quite corellate- see below). Much wringing of hands at losing those staff, but much clapping of hands for the bonuses the directors could see coming. But what was really happening was those staff were being re-employed by consultants working on the contract and design side of the business. The consultants charged 2 or 3 times the salary of the people they employed, but that didn't matter as it was put against CAPEX, not OPEX and therefore the directors all got their bonuses and share handouts. So the costs went up, but never mind mate the directors got their bonuses ;-)

Peromyscus said...

Is OPEX what we Americans call SWB? (Salaries, Wages and Benefits)? You'll be glad to know we call CAPEX CapEx.

IT at my company does a similar thing - it can't "add headcount", so it puts all the salaries on the CapEx and adds a few consultants and Eh Viola (as they say on Internet) they've saved money! It's like magic.

Bruv said...

Hi Sis

I suspect that OPEX is different to SWB as OPEX includes all admin costs, all operational costs of running the finished project, accomodation costs (including maintenance, heating and lighting), salaries, wages and anything that can't be charged against a specific project before it begins operation. By transferring staff to a consultant it can be claimed that 100% of their cost is in the CAPEX bracket rather than the 40 - 50% that project staff usually put against specific projects , when in the original employment.

It is a recognised fact that engineers like myself rarely charge the whole of their time against projects (CAPEX) as there are so times which would be charged against general admin (OPEX)(admin, reports, sick leave, paternity leave holidays, training, team meetings, etc).

Bruv

LinkWithin

Blog Widget by LinkWithin
I sometimes mention a product on this blog, and I give a URL to Amazon or similar sites. Just to reassure you, I don't get paid to advertise anything here and I don't get any money from your clicks. Everything I say here is because I feel like saying it.