GP tells Andrew Lansley NHS reforms are 'wonk'

[Northerner]

GP and columnist Dr Phil Hammond launched a scatching attack on the Government's NHS reforms during a BBC programme, calling the health bill 'wonk' to health secretary Andrew Lansley's face.

Dr Hammond told Mr Lansley on Question Time last night: 'It's 353 pages of wonk. It's impossible to understand it.'

He also asked the health secretary to tell him how many times 'competition', 'co-operation', 'integration' and 'collaboration' appeared in the document.

http://www.pulsetoday.co.uk/newsart...-wonk?sp_rid=NjU3NzMyNzAyOQS2&sp_mid=37229030

(free registration required)

 

[cherrypie]

You can watch it here,
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/question_time/default.stm

 

[Northerner]

You can watch it here,
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/question_time/default.stm

I like Phil Hammond and would much sooner believe him than Lansley any day - he is, after all, a doctor. It does make you wonder what would happen if there was a referendum on these 'reforms', just how many would support it (and why).

 

[FM001]

Watched QT last Thursday, Dr Phil didn't hold back on Lansley on the health reforms and the audience were very critical also.

I was sent a link last week to a YouTube video called the Andrew Lansley Rap, the young man in the video explains everyone's feelings rather well even though he uses some choice language in doing so, would post a link to it here but don't want to get banned by Northerner

 

[Northerner]

Watched QT last Thursday, Dr Phil didn't hold back on Lansley on the health reforms and the audience were very critical also.

I was sent a link last week to a YouTube video called the Andrew Lansley Rap, the young man in the video explains everyone's feelings rather well even though he uses some choice language in doing so, would post a link to it here but don't want to get banned by Northerner

I've seen it and sadly it would breach our rules, but that's not to deny that the sentiments aren't shared! 😉 He just seems so incapable of seeing things from another person's point of view and will not shift an inch. I've read very widely on the topic and from all the stuff I've read there must be something like 95% that is critical/against the reforms - why can't they se this and admit it? The 'listening' exercise was a con - DC claimed to have the backing of the profession which they then swiftly denied! I'm particularly upset at the 150 peers who didn't think it was worth voting on - probably the single most important piece of legislation on the table and affecting the vast majority of the populace, probably for the rest of their natural lives.

 

[FM001]

I've seen it and sadly it would breach our rules, but that's not to deny that the sentiments aren't shared! 😉

Hence why I didn't post it🙂