Possible govt cap on gp visits - petition

[ypauly]

No-one is stopping the discussion, the discussion is being had right now. It's just no longer being held behind closed doors, in secret. Far better to see it out in the daylight where everyone can see it for what it is.

If it was behind closed doors and secret how do you know about it?


How could it ever be considered secret? it's online. http://www.conservativepolicyforum.com/




And what about the good bits? will you be making sure that everybody sees those and what good conservative thinking has lead to?

 

[AndyS]

I wonder if tax and national insurance contributions will be lowered accordingly if restrictions are placed on the number of visits you can have with your GP.

For the last 15 years before being made redundant a couple of weeks ago I was paying about ?1,800 a month tax and NI now trying to claim JSA about ?70 a week you would think I was asking for the crown jewels.

Obviously you don't need a brain to be an MP so I might apply

 

[avantgardaclue]

Can't help but think that if anything like this were to come to pass it would be utter political suicide. Won't happen. Politicos are having to think the unthinkable even if there is no intention of it ever happening they still have to think it.

Heigh ho!

 

[ypauly]

Obviously you don't need a brain to be an MP so I might apply

If you intend to reduce tax an NI you have my vote lol

 

[Twitchy]

I'm not trying to scare people, I just think it's a good idea to give people the opportunity to make it darn clear, preferably at an early stage, that such ideas/muted policy possibilities (& it has to be said this govt seems to have a lot of them) that attack the vulnerable in society are morally repugnent & won't win these people any votes (if that's how they feel of course). Seeing as being in power seems to be all any politician of any creed seems to care about the only thing that seems to resonate is whether they will lose votes.

Incidentally that wasn't the only highlight on the cpf - there was a 'lovely' dickensian topic of whether families should 'be responsible for the care of their infirm relatives'...so where would you draw the line on that spectrum? Just elderly relatives? Disabled kids? Amputee veterans? Paying for all meds? Ok the cpf is a forum for discussion but personally I find the tone of the topics sinister at the least. And do you know what? I'm not a labour supporter, or conservative. At the moment I can't see any party I'd want to vote for frankly, so my sharing this is not political, I'm just highlighting something that people might want to take action on.

 

[ypauly]

Why would people not want to do all they can for infirm (for whatever reason) relatives? why do the family get a choice but the rest of society don't?

Seems strange to me that people think it's dickensian t do what's right. Why is ok to turn your back on your own family and leave strangers to pick up the pieces?



It's not attacking the vulnerable in sciety it is ensuing that the services they rely on are only used by the people that need them as we can't afford to take care of everybody just because some can't be arsed. Those services are put in jeapardy by those that abuse them.


And of course people should have input at an early stage that is what that forum is for. But people starting petitions at the slightest hint of something they dislike being discussed will do nothing to help that much needed conversation taking place.


How many people have read your words and fully understood that GP services are not at risk that they won't be limited? there are some very vulnerable people read this very forum how many of those were scared by your words? how many signed out of a fear for something that isn't even happening?

 

[rachelha]

I was going to post the link to this petition myself and was very pleased to see someone had already done it. The title of the thread, Twitchy's post and the actual petition all make it clear that this is not something which is imminently happening.

Personally I think it is important that they realise that this idea is ridiculous and will not be accepted and they hopefully they will not think about making it any more than an idea.

 

[ypauly]

Personally I think it is important that they realise that this idea is ridiculous and will not be accepted and they hopefully they will not think about making it any more than an idea.

How are they going to realise it's not a good idea if they are not allowed to discuss things?

Seriously, it is a discussion and at the moment these things are generally open affair where normal people can chip in. What affect do you think a petition against something that doesn't actually even exist going have on the discussions other than make them happen in private?

How do you think that would help? It was just political mistchielf making of the highest order using peoples anxieties and fears for political gain by the labour party.

 

[Twitchy]

The petition text:

Dear Jeremy Hunt,

Please reject proposals to limit how many times we can visit our GP.

Being able to visit a doctor, whenever we need to, is at the heart of our NHS.

Please confirm that you will never limit access to GPs, and that our NHS will remain free and universal, without any restrictions.
************

personally, I fail to see how the above is political mischief making, I take it more to be asking for reassurance that the questions were not serious policy proposals but some kind of extreme debating point or something (in which case I have to ask why they would use such an emotive topic, that seems an own goal!). I happen to agree that most people want to care for their relatives, but I stand by my point that that is a slippery slope - what do you count as 'being responsible for the care of your infirm relatives'? What happens if you're responsible but can't afford the meds / nursing home fees / special home adaptions etc? I could also quote the example of a very well off mp who claimed dla for his disabled son - would that be what you class as abuse? 🙄

I'm stepping back from this discussion now - we're all entitled to our opinions & whilst you might think I've been scaremongering I'd rather cry foul & head off a problem than see awful policy decisions come into being because no-one objected. This might just be for 2015 manifestos but after all, this govt got power without being first past the post this time didn't they? Not sure manifestos are worth the paper they are printed on! Just my apolitical opinion of course... 😉

 

[ypauly]

The petition text:

Dear Jeremy Hunt,

Please reject proposals to limit how many times we can visit our GP.

Being able to visit a doctor, whenever we need to, is at the heart of our NHS.

Please confirm that you will never limit access to GPs, and that our NHS will remain free and universal, without any restrictions.
************

personally, I fail to see how the above is political mischief making, I take it more to be asking for reassurance that the questions were not serious policy proposals but some kind of extreme debating point or something (in which case I have to ask why they would use such an emotive topic, that seems an own goal!). I happen to agree that most people want to care for their relatives, but I stand by my point that that is a slippery slope - what do you count as 'being responsible for the care of your infirm relatives'? What happens if you're responsible but can't afford the meds / nursing home fees / special home adaptions etc? I could also quote the example of a very well off mp who claimed dla for his disabled son - would that be what you class as abuse? 🙄

I'm stepping back from this discussion now - we're all entitled to our opinions & whilst you might think I've been scaremongering I'd rather cry foul & head off a problem than see awful policy decisions come into being because no-one objected. This might just be for 2015 manifestos but after all, this govt got power without being first past the post this time didn't they? Not sure manifestos are worth the paper they are printed on! Just my apolitical opinion of course... 😉

Show me where the conservatives have "proposed that" as policy? they have discussed it on a policy forum and had question on it for people to reply but it isn't policy.

It is a lie.


It will scare people.

You are complicit in that.


You are scaring people over something that isn't even likely to ever happen.
People creating petitions and labour MP's issing statements over a discussion is political mistchief making.

You are complicit.

 

[AlisonM]

How are they going to realise it's not a good idea if they are not allowed to discuss things?

Where are you getting the idea that 'they' aren't allowed to discuss 'things'? No-one's stopping any discussion, it's simply that the rest of us are having a say too and most are saying this is a terrible idea. Which it is. Or are you objecting to the fact that other people want to have a say?

 

[ypauly]

Where are you getting the idea that 'they' aren't allowed to discuss 'things'? No-one's stopping any discussion, it's simply that the rest of us are having a say too and most are saying this is a terrible idea. Which it is. Or are you objecting to the fact that other people want to have a say?

Firstly let me be absolutely clear. This would be a terrible idea.

I am objecting to the notion that this is anymore than a discussion. You see the petition words on the previous page making out it is a proposal, it isn't a proposal it's not a policy it's nothing. It is just people playing politics with other peoples fears. I am perfectly happy for the discussion to take place but people (whoever wrote that petition page) are making it out to be some sort of active policy that needs to be changed.


If it was I would be very quiet, very quiet indeed but this is a game for those at the top and I don't like it when they are using people fears for political points and to be clear again I wouldn't like it if it was the other way around either.




When people see something like this they don't say "look at some of the stupid ideas the government is dicussing"

They say "you see what the government are thinking of doing"

There is no need for people to worry about this, well certainly not yet and there are some people who will worry maybe even some of those amonst us.

I don't want that and I don't think you do either.

I signed that last petition against the NHS reforms and I would sign one for this but there is no need now no need at all as this is very unlikely to ever happen.

 

[Twitchy]

If raising awareness of the ideas being muted so people get a chance to vocalise their concerns is complicit, FINE. Better that than sleep walking into more awful policies. The fact is, a lot of people don't trust this govt any more - why do you think organisations like 38 degrees have come into being?! Sheesh, I was daft enough to vote for them last time & I sure as heck don't trust them now!! I don't think giving people the chance to express their concerns is fear mongering personally, but this seems to have hit a nerve with you - may I ask why?

Crossed posts - I agree the wording on the petition could have been clearer, but for me the tone of the questions in the debates was horrible - if these debates are used as sounding boards for forming policy than it's not nice to see such a negative approach. Just my personal opinion of course.

 

[ypauly]

If raising awareness of the ideas being muted so people get a chance to vocalise their concerns is complicit, FINE. Better that than sleep walking into more awful policies. The fact is, a lot of people don't trust this govt any more - why do you think organisations like 38 degrees have come into being?! Sheesh, I was daft enough to vote for them last time & I sure as heck don't trust them now!! I don't think giving people the chance to express their concerns is fear mongering personally, but this seems to have hit a nerve with you - may I ask why?

Crossed posts - I agree the wording on the petition could have been clearer, but for me the tone of the questions in the debates was horrible - if these debates are used as sounding boards for forming policy than it's not nice to see such a negative approach. Just my personal opinion of course.

The nerve was struck for the simple reason that this was deliberately taken off the conservative policy forum for no other reason than to wind people up.

As a conservative I get quite a lot of stick and I happily take most of it but when it is scaring people that can't stand for themselves some of us stronger ones have to make a stand. This was very unlikely to ever see the light of day and the ones who made that happen are the political opponents that are making something of nothing.

This will scare people! it is stupid and I don't want people to worry.

My own mother is an elderly type 1 that gets quite easily confused, imagine her reading this thread before I piped up. Now imagine she feels unwell would she be thinking that she is wasting one of her calls and how many will she have left?

I don't want her or anybody like her to worry ove rnothing.


I make this pledge before I bow out.


I will stand in front of parliament (or as close as I can get) with a placard that says "tories are stupid" all day if this ever gets put before parliament. It doesn't even have to get passed as soon as the conservative issue the papers I will do it

 

[MargB]

I have just got an email from the people who organised the petition to say it is now being denied this was ever being discussed. The organisers are taking it as a victory.

Not involved so don't know the truth but still pleased I signed the petition.

 

[FM001]

I'm not trying to scare people, I just think it's a good idea to give people the opportunity to make it darn clear, preferably at an early stage, that such ideas/muted policy possibilities (& it has to be said this govt seems to have a lot of them) that attack the vulnerable in society are morally repugnent & won't win these people any votes (if that's how they feel of course). Seeing as being in power seems to be all any politician of any creed seems to care about the only thing that seems to resonate is whether they will lose votes.

Incidentally that wasn't the only highlight on the cpf - there was a 'lovely' dickensian topic of whether families should 'be responsible for the care of their infirm relatives'...so where would you draw the line on that spectrum? Just elderly relatives? Disabled kids? Amputee veterans? Paying for all meds? Ok the cpf is a forum for discussion but personally I find the tone of the topics sinister at the least. And do you know what? I'm not a labour supporter, or conservative. At the moment I can't see any party I'd want to vote for frankly, so my sharing this is not political, I'm just highlighting something that people might want to take action on.

Keep doing what your doing Twitchy, this government is the pits and deserve all the negative press they receive here and elsewhere.

Bring on 2015 and lets see the back of them all

 

[Copepod]

Looks like 38 degrees has succeeded in gaining enough signatures, resulting in a grudging apology from Mr Jeremy Hunt.

 

[ypauly]

Looks like 38 degrees has succeeded in gaining enough signatures, resulting in a grudging apology from Mr *unt.

Does that mean I can put my placard awat?