|
|
Post by rogerjonesisgod on Nov 26, 2019 20:34:43 GMT
Sounds like it was a dead heat between Corbyn and Prince Andrew  |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 26, 2019 20:47:32 GMT
Jeremy Corbyn refuses to apologise four times for anti-Semitism allegations in BBC interview link
|
|
|
|
Post by algor on Nov 26, 2019 20:51:52 GMT
Been Conservative for 15 years but voting Labour this time round. The Conservatives are an absolute disgrace and their continued lies and attempts to paint Corbyn as some kind of racist, terrorist sympathiser are nothing short of disgusting. It doesn't take long to research the smears and realise they're exactly that, complete and utter falsehoods made by those seeking to protect their immense wealth and privilege. Unfortunately, vast swathes of the population will simply watch the BBC, read the express and blindly vote Tory. The next 5 years are going to be the most painful yet for those who can't afford yet more years of Tory austerity. You sir are a liar! A quick search of your posts in the summer of 2017 prior to the election sees you bigging up Corbyn and slagging off "savage" Tory cuts! I don't know what would tempt you to post such blatant lies but you have been found out! Conservative for 15 years my arse  |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 26, 2019 21:13:36 GMT
Does everyone voting Conservative not believe they will privatise the NHS or are you just not bothered?
What baffles me is people on media saying it won’t happen when they’ve literally been slowly but surely increasing the number of NHS contracts to private companies for years now.
The NHS’ blood plasma business was sold to a US private equity firm 7 years ago (who sold it to a Chinese firm at a profit of £700m since).
The Health and Social Care Act in 2012 literally set up the legal framework to allow for increasing privatisation.
Are people just unaware of this or don’t they care?
I’m genuinely interested to understand this.
|
|
|
|
Post by salopstick on Nov 26, 2019 21:18:43 GMT
Does everyone voting Conservative not believe they will privatise the NHS or are you just not bothered? What baffles me is people on media saying it won’t happen when they’ve literally been slowly but surely increasing the number of NHS contracts to private companies for years now. The NHS’ blood plasma business was sold to a US private equity firm 7 years ago (who sold it to a Chinese firm at a profit of £700m since). The Health and Social Care Act in 2012 literally set up the legal framework to allow for increasing privatisation. Are people just unaware of this or don’t they care? I’m genuinely interested to understand this. The NHS Will not be privatised The nhs however has to use for profit companies for all of its supplies because the industries that make pills, paper clips etc are not nationalised. How the nhs spends and manages its budget should be more scrutinised and accountable. The PFI Scandal which at the moment is just scare stories I. The right wing press is one of the biggest hits for the NHS |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 26, 2019 21:34:09 GMT
Does everyone voting Conservative not believe they will privatise the NHS or are you just not bothered? What baffles me is people on media saying it won’t happen when they’ve literally been slowly but surely increasing the number of NHS contracts to private companies for years now. The NHS’ blood plasma business was sold to a US private equity firm 7 years ago (who sold it to a Chinese firm at a profit of £700m since). The Health and Social Care Act in 2012 literally set up the legal framework to allow for increasing privatisation. Are people just unaware of this or don’t they care? I’m genuinely interested to understand this. The NHS Will not be privatised The nhs however has to use for profit companies for all of its supplies because the industries that make pills, paper clips etc are not nationalised. How the nhs spends and manages its budget should be more scrutinised and accountable. It’s not just supplies it’s services. Virgin Care provide some services and by services I mean actual healthcare. Many other services are also provided by private companies and when I talk about services - over £9bn in total. Most NHS services HAVE to be put out to competitive tender BY law under the Health and Social Care Act 2012. That’s how Richard Branson sued the NHS because his bid didn’t win and he argued it was against the law. These companies do not do this for free - they do it to make a profit. So they get a contract and get given £X amount of NHS money (I.e. your taxpayer money) which they make a profit out of and I’m not talking small amounts I’m talking millions. This is just a list from Wikipedia en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Private_providers_of_NHS_services. If you know the names of the companies you can search them on the NHS website and it’s all there although I can’t for the life of me find a list of private service providers on the NHS website itself (wonder why). I know this because I’m a lawyer and I’ve seen it with my own eyes. I don’t think people really understand this but am confused as to how they don’t know. Privatisation is literally happening right under everyone’s nose and has been for years. |
|
|
|
Post by rogerjonesisgod on Nov 26, 2019 21:42:00 GMT
Brain dead washed ......
|
|
|
|
Post by algor on Nov 26, 2019 21:42:33 GMT
Does everyone voting Conservative not believe they will privatise the NHS or are you just not bothered? What baffles me is people on media saying it won’t happen when they’ve literally been slowly but surely increasing the number of NHS contracts to private companies for years now. The NHS’ blood plasma business was sold to a US private equity firm 7 years ago (who sold it to a Chinese firm at a profit of £700m since). The Health and Social Care Act in 2012 literally set up the legal framework to allow for increasing privatisation. Are people just unaware of this or don’t they care? I’m genuinely interested to understand this. Around just over 7% of the NHS is privatised and it has been stable at that for quite some time. Most GP surgeries and pharmacy's etc are private so no it doesn't bother me. also some private hospitals are more specialist and cost effective in things like hip and knee replacements, if that lowers waiting times and is done at a good price then that doesn't bother me either. You seem to have an issue with companies being successful or profitable, can you offer any evidence that Blood Plasma is more expensive or harder to procure now or is it just an uninformed rant? You do realise that you can't nationalise the whole NHS supply base don't you? They can't make the tiles on the floor or the cleaning products to clean them, there will always need to be outside procurement and if the companies they bought from were not successful or profitable then they wouldn't be there. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 26, 2019 21:47:15 GMT
Does everyone voting Conservative not believe they will privatise the NHS or are you just not bothered? What baffles me is people on media saying it won’t happen when they’ve literally been slowly but surely increasing the number of NHS contracts to private companies for years now. The NHS’ blood plasma business was sold to a US private equity firm 7 years ago (who sold it to a Chinese firm at a profit of £700m since). The Health and Social Care Act in 2012 literally set up the legal framework to allow for increasing privatisation. Are people just unaware of this or don’t they care? I’m genuinely interested to understand this. Around just over 7% of the NHS is privatised and it has been stable at that for quite some time. Most GP surgeries and pharmacy's etc are private so no it doesn't bother me. also some private hospitals are more specialist and cost effective in things like hip and knee replacements, if that lowers waiting times and is done at a good price then that doesn't bother me either. You seem to have an issue with companies being successful or profitable, can you offer any evidence that Blood Plasma is more expensive or harder to procure now or is it just an uninformed rant? You do realise that you can't nationalise the whole NHS supply base don't you? They can't make the tiles on the floor or the cleaning products to clean them, there will always need to be outside procurement and if the companies they bought from were not successful or profitable then they wouldn't be there. No it isn’t an uninformed rant thank you. Not am I some lunatic socialist as you imply - quite the opposite in fact but there is a difference between public services paid for by the taxpayer and the enormous amounts of that money that now form the profit for private companies and are not invested in the services. As I said it’s not about supplies - of course supplies are needed but actual services and the actual provision of healthcare being contracted out to private companies who are making huge profits and those huge profits are just tax payer money so you’re money going into into peoples hands rather than be reinvested in the system. In case you hadn’t notice services are worse than they have ever been so it’s clearly not working is it. I literally have no idea if blood plasma costs more but the US said the Chinese entity had to sell its US supply as it was worried the services were poor. And some US private house made £700m out it...but that’s fine and it was a great idea to sell it off I’m assume. As I said in my original post it was a genuine question not intended to be a rant. |
|
|
|
Post by algor on Nov 26, 2019 22:06:43 GMT
Around just over 7% of the NHS is privatised and it has been stable at that for quite some time. Most GP surgeries and pharmacy's etc are private so no it doesn't bother me. also some private hospitals are more specialist and cost effective in things like hip and knee replacements, if that lowers waiting times and is done at a good price then that doesn't bother me either. You seem to have an issue with companies being successful or profitable, can you offer any evidence that Blood Plasma is more expensive or harder to procure now or is it just an uninformed rant? You do realise that you can't nationalise the whole NHS supply base don't you? They can't make the tiles on the floor or the cleaning products to clean them, there will always need to be outside procurement and if the companies they bought from were not successful or profitable then they wouldn't be there. No it isn’t an uninformed rant thank you. I’ve literally worked on these deals and listened to these private companies talk about how much profit they made and sssn their accounts. As I said it’s not about supplies - of course supplies are needed but actual services and the actual provision of healthcare being contracted out to private companies who are making huge profits and those huge profits are just tax payer money so you’re money going into into peoples hands rather than be reinvested in the system. In case you hadn’t notice services are worse than they have ever been so it’s clearly not working is it. I literally have no idea if blood plasma costs more but the US said the Chinese entity had to sell its US supply as it was worried the services were poor. And some US private house made £700m out it...but that’s fine and it was a great idea to sell it off I’m assume. So you don't know if the Blood Plasma is cheaper or more expensive, you don't know if it is easier or harder to procure but you think that someone said they offered a poor service? You say you are lawyer but post this???? Really???? Isn't your profession meant to be evidence based, at least a little bit of substance would be welcome. You say that you have facilitated some of these deals and seen the vendor accounts, if this was the case then you would make a much better fist of this. I smell bullshit and you are full of it. Please PM your companies name to me so I can be sure to avoid employing such a poor "lawyer". |
|
|
|
Post by salopstick on Nov 26, 2019 22:07:51 GMT
Does everyone voting Conservative not believe they will privatise the NHS or are you just not bothered? What baffles me is people on media saying it won’t happen when they’ve literally been slowly but surely increasing the number of NHS contracts to private companies for years now. The NHS’ blood plasma business was sold to a US private equity firm 7 years ago (who sold it to a Chinese firm at a profit of £700m since). The Health and Social Care Act in 2012 literally set up the legal framework to allow for increasing privatisation. Are people just unaware of this or don’t they care? I’m genuinely interested to understand this. Around just over 7% of the NHS is privatised and it has been stable at that for quite some time. Most GP surgeries and pharmacy's etc are private so no it doesn't bother me. also some private hospitals are more specialist and cost effective in things like hip and knee replacements, if that lowers waiting times and is done at a good price then that doesn't bother me either. You seem to have an issue with companies being successful or profitable, can you offer any evidence that Blood Plasma is more expensive or harder to procure now or is it just an uninformed rant? You do realise that you can't nationalise the whole NHS supply base don't you? They can't make the tiles on the floor or the cleaning products to clean them, there will always need to be outside procurement and if the companies they bought from were not successful or profitable then they wouldn't be there. Don’t Labour just throw out the claim that the tories will privatise the NHS every election |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 26, 2019 22:13:47 GMT
No it isn’t an uninformed rant thank you. I’ve literally worked on these deals and listened to these private companies talk about how much profit they made and sssn their accounts. As I said it’s not about supplies - of course supplies are needed but actual services and the actual provision of healthcare being contracted out to private companies who are making huge profits and those huge profits are just tax payer money so you’re money going into into peoples hands rather than be reinvested in the system. In case you hadn’t notice services are worse than they have ever been so it’s clearly not working is it. I literally have no idea if blood plasma costs more but the US said the Chinese entity had to sell its US supply as it was worried the services were poor. And some US private house made £700m out it...but that’s fine and it was a great idea to sell it off I’m assume. So you don't know if the Blood Plasma is cheaper or more expensive, you don't know if it is easier or harder to procure but you think that someone said they offered a poor service? You say you are lawyer but post this???? Really???? Isn't your profession meant to be evidence based, at least a little bit of substance would be welcome. You say that you have facilitated some of these deals and seen the vendor accounts, if this was the case then you would make a much better fist of this. I smell bullshit and you are full of it. Please PM your companies name to me so I can be sure to avoid employing such a poor "lawyer". Here you are for the article regarding the issues over the blood plasma supply and the action the US government has taken: www.thetimes.co.uk/article/fears-over-blood-plasma-0nbnzz7b7You can literally google to see the profit the US private equity firm made on its sale to the Chinese company www.energyroyd.org.uk/archives/15696Clearly you only wish to trade insults. Obviously there is not much more I can say for confidentiality reasons but please do look up some the private companies providing services to the NHS on Companies House - it is a public website now and by law all accounts are published on there. You may also wish to do some research into how many Care homes for example are now owned by private equity firms whose sole aim is to generate profits for their shareholders. It’s all there but if you don’t wish to believe it or research and just feel the need to be ridiculous to what was just a genuine question there is very little point in me responding to you. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 26, 2019 22:15:54 GMT
Around just over 7% of the NHS is privatised and it has been stable at that for quite some time. Most GP surgeries and pharmacy's etc are private so no it doesn't bother me. also some private hospitals are more specialist and cost effective in things like hip and knee replacements, if that lowers waiting times and is done at a good price then that doesn't bother me either. You seem to have an issue with companies being successful or profitable, can you offer any evidence that Blood Plasma is more expensive or harder to procure now or is it just an uninformed rant? You do realise that you can't nationalise the whole NHS supply base don't you? They can't make the tiles on the floor or the cleaning products to clean them, there will always need to be outside procurement and if the companies they bought from were not successful or profitable then they wouldn't be there. Don’t Labour just throw out the claim that the tories will privatise the NHS every election Well it’s not wrong is it since they have been since 2012! |
|
|
|
Post by algor on Nov 26, 2019 22:22:44 GMT
Here you are for the article regarding the issues over the blood plasma supply and the action the US government has taken: www.thetimes.co.uk/article/fears-over-blood-plasma-0nbnzz7b7You can literally google to see the profit the US private equity firm made on its sale to the Chinese company www.energyroyd.org.uk/archives/15696Clearly you only wish to trade insults. Obviously there is not much more I can say for confidentiality reasons but please do look up some the private companies providing services to the NHS on Companies House - it is a public website now and by law all accounts are published on there. You may also wish to do some research into how many Care homes for example are now owned by private equity firms whose sole aim is to generate profits for their shareholders. It’s all there but if you don’t wish to believe it or actually there is very little point in me responding to you. For fucks sake mate at least try and read the links you post! This is on the link you posted: "on August 5, 2016 at 10:26 pm said: Sorry Derek, the article should have made clear that this is only about plasma supplies not blood. Plasma is donated by people in America because there is a theoretical risk of contamination of plasma by variant CJD in the UK. Blood that you and others donate in UK is handled by the publicly owned and run NHS Blood and Transplant. I will amend the article to make this clear. No private companies are involved and there is no one profiteering. Thanks for your comment" I mean really? A lawyer? I despair! |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 26, 2019 22:24:28 GMT
Here you are for the article regarding the issues over the blood plasma supply and the action the US government has taken: www.thetimes.co.uk/article/fears-over-blood-plasma-0nbnzz7b7You can literally google to see the profit the US private equity firm made on its sale to the Chinese company www.energyroyd.org.uk/archives/15696Clearly you only wish to trade insults. Obviously there is not much more I can say for confidentiality reasons but please do look up some the private companies providing services to the NHS on Companies House - it is a public website now and by law all accounts are published on there. You may also wish to do some research into how many Care homes for example are now owned by private equity firms whose sole aim is to generate profits for their shareholders. It’s all there but if you don’t wish to believe it or actually there is very little point in me responding to you. For fucks sake mate at least try and read the links you post! This is on the link you posted: "on August 5, 2016 at 10:26 pm said: Sorry Derek, the article should have made clear that this is only about plasma supplies not blood. Plasma is donated by people in America because there is a theoretical risk of contamination of plasma by variant CJD in the UK. Blood that you and others donate in UK is handled by the publicly owned and run NHS Blood and Transplant. I will amend the article to make this clear. No private companies are involved and there is no one profiteering. Thanks for your comment" I mean really? A lawyer? I despair! You do understand that plasma is from/part of blood and it’s called blood plasma as I said? And that article now clearly refers to plasma throughout so obviously it appeared in a previous form but has been corrected? It clearly states how much money was made privately from the original sale of the NHS’ blood plasma supply which was bought by a US private equity firm from the Department of Health. If you would like another link from the Times here you are www.thetimes.co.uk/article/how-bio-products-our-blood-plasma-supplier-ended-up-with-china-zg00fthqnYou could just google NHS blood plasma sale. |
|
|
|
Post by followyoudown on Nov 26, 2019 22:31:23 GMT
Does everyone voting Conservative not believe they will privatise the NHS or are you just not bothered? What baffles me is people on media saying it won’t happen when they’ve literally been slowly but surely increasing the number of NHS contracts to private companies for years now. The NHS’ blood plasma business was sold to a US private equity firm 7 years ago (who sold it to a Chinese firm at a profit of £700m since). The Health and Social Care Act in 2012 literally set up the legal framework to allow for increasing privatisation. Are people just unaware of this or don’t they care? I’m genuinely interested to understand this. Cant find who originally posted this but it sums up the NHS that has been under Tory control for over 40 years of its existence You do realise Labour privatised far more (GP's) in terms of contracts as well as the PFI funding meaning all those new hospitals built we don't own. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 26, 2019 22:32:46 GMT
Does everyone voting Conservative not believe they will privatise the NHS or are you just not bothered? What baffles me is people on media saying it won’t happen when they’ve literally been slowly but surely increasing the number of NHS contracts to private companies for years now. The NHS’ blood plasma business was sold to a US private equity firm 7 years ago (who sold it to a Chinese firm at a profit of £700m since). The Health and Social Care Act in 2012 literally set up the legal framework to allow for increasing privatisation. Are people just unaware of this or don’t they care? I’m genuinely interested to understand this. Cant find who originally posted this but it sums up the NHS that has been under Tory control for over 40 years of its existence You do realise Labour privatised far more (GP's) in terms of contracts as well as the PFI funding meaning all those new hospitals built we don't own. I do although I wouldn’t call the Labour government that did that a “Labour government”. It’s a very fair point but my query was just intended to be whether people are aware that the NHS is already partly privatised as social media suggests people think it won’t happen and are unaware it already has. Seems to be a few more educated folk on here. |
|
|
|
Post by serpico on Nov 26, 2019 22:34:03 GMT
Does everyone voting Conservative not believe they will privatise the NHS or are you just not bothered? What baffles me is people on media saying it won’t happen when they’ve literally been slowly but surely increasing the number of NHS contracts to private companies for years now. The NHS’ blood plasma business was sold to a US private equity firm 7 years ago (who sold it to a Chinese firm at a profit of £700m since). The Health and Social Care Act in 2012 literally set up the legal framework to allow for increasing privatisation. Are people just unaware of this or don’t they care? I’m genuinely interested to understand this. If they were going to privatise it wouldn't they have done it by now ? they've been in power for the best part of a decade! the last labour government did more privatising than the tories ever have. the NHS will have to be reformed sooner or later, its an unsustainable model, thats why most other first world nations haven't adopted the system wholesale, but we're not ready for that debate yet, it's still very much heresy to even suggest another way to distribute health care other than to ration it out, it will probably bankrupt the country before people realise the inherent flaws in state run health care. |
|
|
|
Post by algor on Nov 26, 2019 22:37:09 GMT
For fucks sake mate at least try and read the links you post! This is on the link you posted: "on August 5, 2016 at 10:26 pm said: Sorry Derek, the article should have made clear that this is only about plasma supplies not blood. Plasma is donated by people in America because there is a theoretical risk of contamination of plasma by variant CJD in the UK. Blood that you and others donate in UK is handled by the publicly owned and run NHS Blood and Transplant. I will amend the article to make this clear. No private companies are involved and there is no one profiteering. Thanks for your comment" I mean really? A lawyer? I despair! You do understand that plasma is from/part of blood and it’s called blood plasma as I said? And that article now clearly refers to plasma throughout so obviously it appeared in a previous form but has been corrected? It clearly states how much money was made privately from the original sale of the NHS’ blood plasma supply which was bought by a US private equity firm from the Department of Health. If you would like another link from the Times here you are www.thetimes.co.uk/article/how-bio-products-our-blood-plasma-supplier-ended-up-with-china-zg00fthqnYou could just google NHS blood plasma sale. Do you not think it reasonable that the NHS procures Plasma donated by foreigners from foreign companies? Perhaps you advocate building and maintaining a network of Plasma donation stations throughout the USA in order to keep it nationalised? Stop digging mate, you are getting deeper and deeper! |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 26, 2019 22:39:54 GMT
You do understand that plasma is from/part of blood and it’s called blood plasma as I said? And that article now clearly refers to plasma throughout so obviously it appeared in a previous form but has been corrected? It clearly states how much money was made privately from the original sale of the NHS’ blood plasma supply which was bought by a US private equity firm from the Department of Health. If you would like another link from the Times here you are www.thetimes.co.uk/article/how-bio-products-our-blood-plasma-supplier-ended-up-with-china-zg00fthqnYou could just google NHS blood plasma sale. Do you not think it reasonable that the NHS procures Plasma donated by foreigners from foreign companies? Perhaps you advocate building and maintaining a network of Plasma donation stations throughout the USA in order to keep it nationalised? Stop digging mate, you are getting deeper and deeper! You’ve literally missed the entire point of what I’ve said and what those articles say and what happened. The NHS business was sold off to a private company. I don’t know what you’re on about donations from foreigners and foreign companies. It was part of the NHS which was sold to a foreign company who then sold it to another foreign company and made £700m. |
|
|
|
Post by rogerjonesisgod on Nov 26, 2019 22:39:58 GMT
Prestwich: "Corbyn's just smearing the Labour Party"
|
|
|
|
Post by crapslinger on Nov 26, 2019 22:42:40 GMT
Cant find who originally posted this but it sums up the NHS that has been under Tory control for over 40 years of its existence You do realise Labour privatised far more (GP's) in terms of contracts as well as the PFI funding meaning all those new hospitals built we don't own. I do although I wouldn’t call the Labour government that did that a “Labour government”. It’s a very fair point but my query was just intended to be whether people are aware that the NHS is already partly privatised as social media suggests people think it won’t happen and are unaware it already has. Seems to be a few more educated folk on here. You are aware who introduced PFI to the HNS aren't you ? the thin edge of the wedge thanks Labour  |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 26, 2019 22:45:21 GMT
I do although I wouldn’t call the Labour government that did that a “Labour government”. It’s a very fair point but my query was just intended to be whether people are aware that the NHS is already partly privatised as social media suggests people think it won’t happen and are unaware it already has. Seems to be a few more educated folk on here. You are aware who introduced PFI to the HNS aren't you ? the thin edge of the wedge thanks Labour Again another person who doesn’t appear to have read what I’ve said when it starts with “I do”. I’m sure there are many Labour voters wouldn’t offer any support for Tony Blair and his New Labour government. |
|
|
|
Post by algor on Nov 26, 2019 22:52:47 GMT
Do you not think it reasonable that the NHS procures Plasma donated by foreigners from foreign companies? Perhaps you advocate building and maintaining a network of Plasma donation stations throughout the USA in order to keep it nationalised? Stop digging mate, you are getting deeper and deeper! You’ve literally missed the entire point of what I’ve said and what those articles say and what happened. The NHS business was sold off to a private company. I don’t know what you’re on about donations from foreigners and foreign companies. It was part of the NHS which was sold to a foreign company who then sold it to another foreign company and made £700m. God you are hard work, you really are! The change had to happen due to the concerns of contamination of CJD in the Plasma, this meant sourcing the plasma from countries who had little or no record of CJD hence the USA donors. Obviously this led to companies in the USA being in charge of the collection and distribution of the donors plasma! What possible alternative was there? It's perfectly clear that the change was made due to possible CJD contamination and absolutely nothing to do with costs or a perceived wish to privatise. I say again.... A lawyer, you! Give me a fucking break! |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 26, 2019 22:57:13 GMT
You’ve literally missed the entire point of what I’ve said and what those articles say and what happened. The NHS business was sold off to a private company. I don’t know what you’re on about donations from foreigners and foreign companies. It was part of the NHS which was sold to a foreign company who then sold it to another foreign company and made £700m. God you are hard work, you really are! The change had to happen due to the concerns of contamination of CJD in the Plasma, this meant sourcing the plasma from countries who had no record of CJD hence the USA donors. Obviously this led to companies in the USA being in charge of the collection and distribution of the donors plasma! What possible alternative was there? It's perfectly clear that the change was made due to possible CJD contamination and absolutely nothing to do with costs or a perceived wish to privatise. I say again.... A lawyer, you! Give me a fucking break! No it didn’t. The CJD concerns led to the UK importing blood plasma before the sale. The department was still part of the NHS. The sale of the department happened in 2013. It was nothing to do with CJD and I’m not talking about importing. |
|
|
|
Post by algor on Nov 26, 2019 23:13:41 GMT
God you are hard work, you really are! The change had to happen due to the concerns of contamination of CJD in the Plasma, this meant sourcing the plasma from countries who had no record of CJD hence the USA donors. Obviously this led to companies in the USA being in charge of the collection and distribution of the donors plasma! What possible alternative was there? It's perfectly clear that the change was made due to possible CJD contamination and absolutely nothing to do with costs or a perceived wish to privatise. I say again.... A lawyer, you! Give me a fucking break! No it didn’t. The CJD concerns led to the UK importing blood plasma since 1996. The department was still part of the NHS. The sale of the department happened in 2013. It was nothing to do with CJD or I’m not talking about importing. How can the NHS be responsible for the collection and distribution of Plasma donated by people in the USA? It has to be done by companies in the USA. You are just headline grabbing the cost of an American company being involved in a buyout by a Chinese company to suit your agenda. PRUK was never responsible for managing the donation aspect of the plasma in any case so this was always out sourced! |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 26, 2019 23:21:33 GMT
No it didn’t. The CJD concerns led to the UK importing blood plasma since 1996. The department was still part of the NHS. The sale of the department happened in 2013. It was nothing to do with CJD or I’m not talking about importing. How can the NHS be responsible for the collection and distribution of Plasma donated by people in the USA? It has to be done by companies in the USA. You are just headline grabbing the cost of an American company being involved in a buyout by a Chinese company to suit your agenda. PRUK was never responsible for managing the donation aspect of the plasma in any case so this was always out sourced! Of course it wasn’t responsible for collecting donations. I’ve haven’t said it was. Bain Capital is a private equity firm not a healthcare company so neither did it collect the donations! Plasma UK turned the plasma it imported into the treatment delivered to the patients. The private equity firm bought that business not the plasma that was donated. It’s not at all headline grabbing it’s a clear example of (a proftiable) part of the NHS being sold off. |
|
|
|
Post by Foster on Nov 26, 2019 23:29:13 GMT
You’ve literally missed the entire point of what I’ve said and what those articles say and what happened. The NHS business was sold off to a private company. I don’t know what you’re on about donations from foreigners and foreign companies. It was part of the NHS which was sold to a foreign company who then sold it to another foreign company and made £700m. God you are hard work, you really are! The change had to happen due to the concerns of contamination of CJD in the Plasma, this meant sourcing the plasma from countries who had little or no record of CJD hence the USA donors. Obviously this led to companies in the USA being in charge of the collection and distribution of the donors plasma! What possible alternative was there? It's perfectly clear that the change was made due to possible CJD contamination and absolutely nothing to do with costs or a perceived wish to privatise. I say again.... A lawyer, you! Give me a fucking break! Reading between the lines.... Are you jealous of his job? I mean, it's all good and well debating like an adult but your continued WUM remarks concerning his profession just seem totally unnecessary. |
|
|
|
Post by rogerjonesisgod on Nov 27, 2019 0:47:29 GMT
"I set trends dem man copy"
|
|
|
|
Post by trickydicky73 on Nov 27, 2019 5:08:44 GMT
Let's not forget, Boris has to face the Neil grilling, yet. This is going far too well at the moment, I can see a catastrophe looming.
|
|
