Since the Tories got back into power they have been running our health service into the ground, way before this pandemic, via their austerity and privatisation by stealth agenda.

A bonus, as a thank you to all the front line NHS workers, would be great, but misses the point that staff have been leaving the service in droves due to pay and working conditions for several years now. A decent pay rise is needed not only for current staff but also to attract new.

The UK economy is one of the strongest in the world due to its healthy workforce thanks to our NHS, but as under previous Tory governments they miss that point, and their policy is to run it as much on a shoestring as possible. If they had their way it would be sold off piecemeal to private concerns enabling more tax cuts and to the benefit of their party donors and cronies, who no doubt all have private health cover to boot.

Hang on Mike, I think you need to check your history here. The most significant element of privatisation in the NHS started well before that. John Major's government introduced PFI, but the Blair/Brown period saw a massive acceleration leaving many Trusts hamstrung by the revenue consequences for decades to come. It was also a period where we saw things like cleaning contracts and IT services being outsourced, as well as a range of ancilliary services. Anything this government may have done in 15 short months pales into insignificance.

Think Matt Hancock suggested this offer was what was affordable in difficult economic situation.

HMRC staff are getting a 13% psy rise over 3 years admittedly with some T & C reform. Not to begrudge them especially after rapid introduction of furlough scheme, but, seems a strange argument from the Health Secretary.

https://www.lbc.co.uk/radio/presenters/ ... y-dispute/

Still money spent elsewhere in Government will help the economy recover quicker. Look forward to these daily briefings.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/uk-politics-56295191

I think the point being missed in this argument is permanency. Most are calling for an across the board NHS payrise exceeding 1%. There are around 1.1 million directly contracted staff working in the NHS. Any across the board rise of the nature some are suggesting (5, 10, even higher on this thread) would have a significant impact on the economy for years to come - it is permanent and in fact creates a cumulative impact going forward.

So it then has to be paid for which is of course the tricky bit that no-one bothers to think about. Some may be willing to stomach a 2-3% increase on the basic rate of tax (though I doubt they'd be so charitable in subsequent years when the impact is felt on their pocket). Or maybe we should abandon the triple lock on pensions as a contribution? I suspect there are pensioners on here so what do we think of that?

That's why I believe the settlement should be something like:

- 1.5 - 2% across the board
- Default honouring of all staff increments for one year only (in effect an automated 2nd pay rise for many - as I said earlier, the public don't tend to know about the increment scheme)
- A one-off Covid service recognition for frontline staff - value to be determined but I think deserving higher than in Scotland.
- Recognition programme extended to other frontline services - e.g. police officers.

In this way you are recognising the committment and risks taken by so many on our behalves, but not creating a cumulative impact.

To pay for it, I would go for a one-year only increase on the basic rate, but deferred until the recovery sets in. Announce it now though so that people are clear on what's coming, and what it's for. I think very few would argue the fairness of taxation applied this way.

Frank theyve found £37 billion in the last year to give to their mates to run a failed test and trace operation - almost equivalent to the Defense budget - which its estimated the nhs could have run successfully for 1/3 of the cost. Interest rates are practically zero, the money is there, it’s all about choices and the Tory parties friends relatives and donors come first, the nurses last.

Frank theyve found £37 billion in the last year to give to their mates to run a failed test and trace operation - almost equivalent to the Defense budget - which its estimated the nhs could have run successfully for 1/3 of the cost. Interest rates are practically zero, the money is there, it’s all about choices and the Tory parties friends relatives and donors come first, the nurses last.

One-off contracts. And that money has gone.

Oh that’s alright then.

The point is if they want to do it the money is a) there and b) could be paid for by say scrapping higher rate tax relief on pension contributions or even equalising the corporation tax rate with the income tax rate. Why should I be paying less tax than a nurse?

It’s all choices.

Think Matt Hancock suggested this offer was what was affordable in difficult economic situation.

HMRC staff are getting a 13% psy rise over 3 years admittedly with some T & C reform. Not to begrudge them especially after rapid introduction of furlough scheme, but, seems a strange argument from the Health Secretary.

https://www.lbc.co.uk/radio/presenters/ ... y-dispute/

Still money spent elsewhere in Government will help the economy recover quicker. Look forward to these daily briefings.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/uk-politics-56295191

I think the point being missed in this argument is permanency. Most are calling for an across the board NHS payrise exceeding 1%. There are around 1.1 million directly contracted staff working in the NHS. Any across the board rise of the nature some are suggesting (5, 10, even higher on this thread) would have a significant impact on the economy for years to come - it is permanent and in fact creates a cumulative impact going forward.

So it then has to be paid for which is of course the tricky bit that no-one bothers to think about. Some may be willing to stomach a 2-3% increase on the basic rate of tax (though I doubt they'd be so charitable in subsequent years when the impact is felt on their pocket). Or maybe we should abandon the triple lock on pensions as a contribution? I suspect there are pensioners on here so what do we think of that?

That's why I believe the settlement should be something like:

- 1.5 - 2% across the board
- Default honouring of all staff increments for one year only (in effect an automated 2nd pay rise for many - as I said earlier, the public don't tend to know about the increment scheme)
- A one-off Covid service recognition for frontline staff - value to be determined but I think deserving higher than in Scotland.
- Recognition programme extended to other frontline services - e.g. police officers.

In this way you are recognising the committment and risks taken by so many on our behalves, but not creating a cumulative impact.

To pay for it, I would go for a one-year only increase on the basic rate, but deferred until the recovery sets in. Announce it now though so that people are clear on what's coming, and what it's for. I think very few would argue the fairness of taxation applied this way.

I like your question about the triple lock, which has been bothering me for some while. We pensioners are now looking like a lucky generation. We’ve experienced generally full employment, affordable housing and reasonable pensions for many. We all know that most of us could afford to contribute more, particularly as we reach the stage in our life where we make our greatest use of the NHS.

The problem is that we are three times more like to vote than under 30s, and twice as likely to vote as under 60s. Consequently it’s probable that no party will have the balls to remove the triple lock.

However, supposing our government said to us look, we will only increase the taxes of those pensioners who can afford it, and we guarantee to hypothecate the tax so that it goes directly to the NHS as a published statistic, and we do this for a period of, say, three years until we are emerging from this crisis. You’d have to be a pretty stingy pensioner to vote against that. Pretty sure it won’t happen though.

Since the Tories got back into power they have been running our health service into the ground, way before this pandemic, via their austerity and privatisation by stealth agenda.

A bonus, as a thank you to all the front line NHS workers, would be great, but misses the point that staff have been leaving the service in droves due to pay and working conditions for several years now. A decent pay rise is needed not only for current staff but also to attract new.

The UK economy is one of the strongest in the world due to its healthy workforce thanks to our NHS, but as under previous Tory governments they miss that point, and their policy is to run it as much on a shoestring as possible. If they had their way it would be sold off piecemeal to private concerns enabling more tax cuts and to the benefit of their party donors and cronies, who no doubt all have private health cover to boot.

Hang on Mike, I think you need to check your history here. The most significant element of privatisation in the NHS started well before that. John Major's government introduced PFI, but the Blair/Brown period saw a massive acceleration leaving many Trusts hamstrung by the revenue consequences for decades to come. It was also a period where we saw things like cleaning contracts and IT services being outsourced, as well as a range of ancilliary services. Anything this government may have done in 15 short months pales into insignificance.

You're right Frank and it dates back even before John Major's govt to Thatcher's, where the seeds of asset stripping philosophy were sown and applied to our national institutions via privatisation.

PFI under both the Tories and Labour has proved to be a complete disaster also enabling a form of profiteering, although I don't have a problem with contracting out non medical services such as cleaning and IT, I do have a problem with the NHS having to contract out to private hospitals due to lack of it's own facilities and ultimately control of its own spending.

The point I am trying to make is that our economy benefits from an efficient and healthy workforce underpinned by an efficient and well resourced health service, privateering and profiteering should not be part of the equation when it comes to the nations health.

Since the Tories got back into power they have been running our health service into the ground, way before this pandemic, via their austerity and privatisation by stealth agenda.

A bonus, as a thank you to all the front line NHS workers, would be great, but misses the point that staff have been leaving the service in droves due to pay and working conditions for several years now. A decent pay rise is needed not only for current staff but also to attract new.

The UK economy is one of the strongest in the world due to its healthy workforce thanks to our NHS, but as under previous Tory governments they miss that point, and their policy is to run it as much on a shoestring as possible. If they had their way it would be sold off piecemeal to private concerns enabling more tax cuts and to the benefit of their party donors and cronies, who no doubt all have private health cover to boot.

Hang on Mike, I think you need to check your history here. The most significant element of privatisation in the NHS started well before that. John Major's government introduced PFI, but the Blair/Brown period saw a massive acceleration leaving many Trusts hamstrung by the revenue consequences for decades to come. It was also a period where we saw things like cleaning contracts and IT services being outsourced, as well as a range of ancilliary services. Anything this government may have done in 15 short months pales into insignificance.

We are not talking 15 short mo ths! We are talking since 2010. Significant cuts to NHS funding and the ending of bursaries for student nurses leaving us short of nurses surprise surprise. Anybody working in or near the NHS knows the NHS is stretched to the limit at the best of times. When we get a crisis such as now it is unable to cope requiring lengthy lockdowns therefore. Frank of course conveniently overlooked the role of the Thatcher Government in initiating privatisation.

[Biggs]

It makes the clapping from ministers even more cynical, in my view. I never actually did it, because it just felt like a token gesture when they needed real help and real pay.

And there's this constant narrative of NHS staff being 'heroes'... which is true, but the cynical part of me thinks that is to 1) frame them as superhumans working against the odds and with little pay, and 2) to frame that as acceptable state of affairs.

I.e. part of what makes them heroes, is the low pay

Think Matt Hancock suggested this offer was what was affordable in difficult economic situation.

HMRC staff are getting a 13% psy rise over 3 years admittedly with some T & C reform. Not to begrudge them especially after rapid introduction of furlough scheme, but, seems a strange argument from the Health Secretary.

https://www.lbc.co.uk/radio/presenters/ ... y-dispute/

Still money spent elsewhere in Government will help the economy recover quicker. Look forward to these daily briefings.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/uk-politics-56295191

I think the point being missed in this argument is permanency. Most are calling for an across the board NHS payrise exceeding 1%. There are around 1.1 million directly contracted staff working in the NHS. Any across the board rise of the nature some are suggesting (5, 10, even higher on this thread) would have a significant impact on the economy for years to come - it is permanent and in fact creates a cumulative impact going forward.

So it then has to be paid for which is of course the tricky bit that no-one bothers to think about. Some may be willing to stomach a 2-3% increase on the basic rate of tax (though I doubt they'd be so charitable in subsequent years when the impact is felt on their pocket). Or maybe we should abandon the triple lock on pensions as a contribution? I suspect there are pensioners on here so what do we think of that?

That's why I believe the settlement should be something like:

- 1.5 - 2% across the board
- Default honouring of all staff increments for one year only (in effect an automated 2nd pay rise for many - as I said earlier, the public don't tend to know about the increment scheme)
- A one-off Covid service recognition for frontline staff - value to be determined but I think deserving higher than in Scotland.
- Recognition programme extended to other frontline services - e.g. police officers.

In this way you are recognising the committment and risks taken by so many on our behalves, but not creating a cumulative impact.

To pay for it, I would go for a one-year only increase on the basic rate, but deferred until the recovery sets in. Announce it now though so that people are clear on what's coming, and what it's for. I think very few would argue the fairness of taxation applied this way.

I like your question about the triple lock, which has been bothering me for some while. We pensioners are now looking like a lucky generation. We’ve experienced generally full employment, affordable housing and reasonable pensions for many. We all know that most of us could afford to contribute more, particularly as we reach the stage in our life where we make our greatest use of the NHS.

The problem is that we are three times more like to vote than under 30s, and twice as likely to vote as under 60s. Consequently it’s probable that no party will have the balls to remove the triple lock.

However, supposing our government said to us look, we will only increase the taxes of those pensioners who can afford it, and we guarantee to hypothecate the tax so that it goes directly to the NHS as a published statistic, and we do this for a period of, say, three years until we are emerging from this crisis. You’d have to be a pretty stingy pensioner to vote against that. Pretty sure it won’t happen though.

Absolutely mervyn. And as it was Cameron's government that introduced the triple lock, I think that any pensioner who doesn't vote Tory should be made to contribute their ill-gotten gains to an NHS fund.

It makes the clapping from ministers even more cynical, in my view. I never actually did it, because it just felt like a token gesture when they needed real help and real pay.

And there's this constant narrative of NHS staff being 'heroes'... which is true, but the cynical part of me thinks that is to 1) frame them as superhumans working against the odds and with little pay, and 2) to frame that as acceptable state of affairs.

I.e. part of what makes them heroes, is the low pay

You can see Boreass's thought processes here!

I was in hospital and looked after magnificently.
I clapped them for their efforts.
Would I do that work for that pay? Not a ******* chance!
So they're good but they must be idiots so I can easily slide a rubbish payrise past them!!
Boreass wins again!!

It isn't rocket science is it! If he offered a 'real' 1% payrise i.e. current RPI or inflation whatever PLUS 1% he might slip it through but he honestly thinks the great British public is naive and gullible.

Some of them never even went to Eton!!

And there's this constant narrative of NHS staff being 'heroes'... which is true, but the cynical part of me thinks that is to 1) frame them as superhumans working against the odds and with little pay, and 2) to frame that as acceptable state of affairs.

I.e. part of what makes them heroes, is the low pay

As an aside, my nursey-wife absolutely hates the hero and superhero label given to her and her colleagues. Sure many of the memes on social media are done with the best intention from members of the public, but - in my wife's eyes - it gives portrays them as something which they're not. She's not a superhero: she's a nurse. It's a job, not a vocation (another reason why nurses have historically been underfunded). She isn't a superhero, because in the Marvel or DC universes, superheroes don't die and have super-armour: in this pandemic nursing, clinical and other front-line staff have put their lives at risk because if inadequate PPE.

[Biggs]

Exactly , expressed way better than my post.