Save Lewisham Hospital demo - updates and pictures

Save Lewisham Hospital demo - updates and pictures

Thousands of people marching against proposals to close Lewisham Hospital A&E

Health secretary Jeremy Hunt

First published in Lewisham
Last updated
News Shopper: Photograph of the Author by , deputy news editor

ORGANISERS say at least 20,000 people have joined a march today to protest against the proposed closure of Lewisham A&E and maternity services.

Residents, health workers, business leaders and politicians from across south east London gathered at Loampit Vale before marching down towards the hospital.

Traffic held up by the march beeped horns in support while the biggest cheers of the day came as protestors walked past the hospital, a small group of nurses waving them on.

Thousands gathered at a muddy Mountsfield Park to hear speeches from speakers including MPs, campaigners and radio show host Nick Ferrari, whose son's life was saved by Lewisham doctors.

Save Lewisham Hospital campaigner Dr Louise Irvine told News Shopper: "It's so exciting and I'm really proud. We have to thank everybody who's supported this campaign."

She said: "But even if Lewisham is saved we still have to fight to save services in Bexley, Greenwich and Bromley where 100s of jobs will be lost.

"This is the spearhead of a real fight back. We're saying 'no more, we're drawing a line'."

Lewisham East MP Heidi Alexander branded the plans, made to solve financial problems at the neighbouring South London Heathcare Trust, "sheer madness".

She told the crowds: "This whole process from the off has been driven by an accountant's bottom line."


Click here to see pictures from the Save Lewisham Hospital protest


Jim Doolin, 76, of Ladywell said: "It's about saving the NHS. Everybody needs it from the cradle to the grave. You have to defend it."

Natalie Beaumont, who works at the hospital and was the star of BBC show The Choir, said she was "overwhelmed" by the support.

She said: "When we walked past the hospital I wanted to cry.

"It's just shown people the Lewisham community supports us. Jeremy Hunt should listen to these people, the people who matter."

Mr Hunt is due to make his decision by February 1. If he backs the closures, Lewisham Council is expected to make a legal challenge.

Comments (15)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

3:40pm Sat 26 Jan 13

Polly Staight says...

Well I do not approve of the concept of the NHS, I am not alone, only the good people of Cuba agree with the UK that an NHS is the way forward.

The evidence that a command led health system is the best way forward is what this proposed closure is all about.

If one puts their trust in government to deliver a service of some kind, the only thing that is guaranteed is that it will be as responsive as the Titanic was in 1912.

The rest of the time the PTB will be working out ways of asset stripping, usually to protect their own jobs...

...meanwhile the the people at the pointy end... Doctors, nurses, porters, paramedics (and patients) get the run around.

So I support this protest along with the rest of the "daily robbed" tax slaves.
Well I do not approve of the concept of the NHS, I am not alone, only the good people of Cuba agree with the UK that an NHS is the way forward. The evidence that a command led health system is the best way forward is what this proposed closure is all about. If one puts their trust in government to deliver a service of some kind, the only thing that is guaranteed is that it will be as responsive as the Titanic was in 1912. The rest of the time the PTB will be working out ways of asset stripping, usually to protect their own jobs... ...meanwhile the the people at the pointy end... Doctors, nurses, porters, paramedics (and patients) get the run around. So I support this protest along with the rest of the "daily robbed" tax slaves. Polly Staight
  • Score: 0

7:05pm Sat 26 Jan 13

londonlive says...

Polly Staight wrote:
Well I do not approve of the concept of the NHS, I am not alone, only the good people of Cuba agree with the UK that an NHS is the way forward.

The evidence that a command led health system is the best way forward is what this proposed closure is all about.

If one puts their trust in government to deliver a service of some kind, the only thing that is guaranteed is that it will be as responsive as the Titanic was in 1912.

The rest of the time the PTB will be working out ways of asset stripping, usually to protect their own jobs...

...meanwhile the the people at the pointy end... Doctors, nurses, porters, paramedics (and patients) get the run around.

So I support this protest along with the rest of the "daily robbed" tax slaves.
I'm probably not alone in not having a clue what your on about.
[quote][p][bold]Polly Staight[/bold] wrote: Well I do not approve of the concept of the NHS, I am not alone, only the good people of Cuba agree with the UK that an NHS is the way forward. The evidence that a command led health system is the best way forward is what this proposed closure is all about. If one puts their trust in government to deliver a service of some kind, the only thing that is guaranteed is that it will be as responsive as the Titanic was in 1912. The rest of the time the PTB will be working out ways of asset stripping, usually to protect their own jobs... ...meanwhile the the people at the pointy end... Doctors, nurses, porters, paramedics (and patients) get the run around. So I support this protest along with the rest of the "daily robbed" tax slaves.[/p][/quote]I'm probably not alone in not having a clue what your on about. londonlive
  • Score: 0

9:40pm Sat 26 Jan 13

Polly Staight says...

That's probably because I can read, write and speak English.

Unlike you, who appear to have an issue with writing, and comprehension.

Anyway...

Life goes on, I suppose.
That's probably because I can read, write and speak English. Unlike you, who appear to have an issue with writing, and comprehension. Anyway... Life goes on, I suppose. Polly Staight
  • Score: 0

9:48pm Sat 26 Jan 13

londonlive says...

Polly Staight wrote:
That's probably because I can read, write and speak English.

Unlike you, who appear to have an issue with writing, and comprehension.

Anyway...

Life goes on, I suppose.
Really? You can deduce that can you?

Back to the point - why are you so against the NHS? A system that was set up to help you?

Very strange. Would you care to reveal who you are and what sets you apart from the vast majority of people that support the NHS and are in support of the demonstration this article reports?
[quote][p][bold]Polly Staight[/bold] wrote: That's probably because I can read, write and speak English. Unlike you, who appear to have an issue with writing, and comprehension. Anyway... Life goes on, I suppose.[/p][/quote]Really? You can deduce that can you? Back to the point - why are you so against the NHS? A system that was set up to help you? Very strange. Would you care to reveal who you are and what sets you apart from the vast majority of people that support the NHS and are in support of the demonstration this article reports? londonlive
  • Score: 0

9:52pm Sat 26 Jan 13

londonlive says...

londonlive wrote:
Polly Staight wrote:
That's probably because I can read, write and speak English.

Unlike you, who appear to have an issue with writing, and comprehension.

Anyway...

Life goes on, I suppose.
Really? You can deduce that can you?

Back to the point - why are you so against the NHS? A system that was set up to help you?

Very strange. Would you care to reveal who you are and what sets you apart from the vast majority of people that support the NHS and are in support of the demonstration this article reports?
"If one puts their trust in government to deliver a service of some kind, the only thing that is guaranteed is that it will be as responsive as the Titanic was in 1912.
"

I take it you're above using public services are you? In why case either reveal why, so shut up.
[quote][p][bold]londonlive[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Polly Staight[/bold] wrote: That's probably because I can read, write and speak English. Unlike you, who appear to have an issue with writing, and comprehension. Anyway... Life goes on, I suppose.[/p][/quote]Really? You can deduce that can you? Back to the point - why are you so against the NHS? A system that was set up to help you? Very strange. Would you care to reveal who you are and what sets you apart from the vast majority of people that support the NHS and are in support of the demonstration this article reports?[/p][/quote]"If one puts their trust in government to deliver a service of some kind, the only thing that is guaranteed is that it will be as responsive as the Titanic was in 1912. " I take it you're above using public services are you? In why case either reveal why, so shut up. londonlive
  • Score: 0

11:15pm Sat 26 Jan 13

nearly right all the time says...

How is this all Paid for?

Oh yes TAX PAYERs

I forgot we had the olympics,
jubilee!

Now we cant pay for A&Es,Fire stations
or Police
Well done Middle England!
How is this all Paid for? Oh yes TAX PAYERs I forgot we had the olympics, jubilee! Now we cant pay for A&Es,Fire stations or Police Well done Middle England! nearly right all the time
  • Score: 0

1:35am Sun 27 Jan 13

Polly Staight says...

@londonlive, if you take the trouble to read and comprehend the words and the resulting substance of what I wrote, you will deduce that I support the efforts of everyone that are attempting to keep Lewisham Hospital as it is... I wish it was even better in fact, I use it myself.

The point I was making about the NHS is that it is a crap idea, and the execution of that idea has proven to be as poor as every other attempt by government (anywhere in the world) to create a command economy, it simply isn't possible.

As an example...

In 1947 (let's call that BNHS (before the NHS)), there were 19 hospitals in the area covered by Lewisham and the three failing hospitals that are being discussed.

Let's pick an individual hospital... St. Nicholas in Plumstead... I choose this because my father his sister, and (obviously) his parents lived in Plumstead during his childhood...

BNHS...

They were poor people, even though the parents both worked at the Woolwich Arsenal. All members of the family needed to visit the hospital at least once... due to motorcycle accident, difficult pregnancy, scarlet fever and diphtheria. All of those stays and treatments were free, because they were poor people, and the hospital management decided that to be the case.

St. Nicks was the local hospital, it belonged to the people of Plumstead, and the people of Plumstead financed it voluntarily and willingly... it was a highly valued amenity, which until the NHS came along was a given.

1948, NHS is born... Somewhere around 1980, St. Nicks closes its doors.

There were hundreds of medical facilities around the country, all of which had been the result of much experimentation about what worked and what didn't... Some of the schemes failed and some survived, the failures were replaced with new ideas...

...One such scheme was called something like the Peckham experiment or some such (the BBC is always waffling on about how great it was)...

This is what is called "a demand" economy...

People demanded a service and local business, charity, church, college would find a way of meeting the demand. So much so, that there were...

19... Nineteen hospitals within the area now covered by the four that are currently under discussion, and are not that good. They were ALL viable and none were constantly under threat of closure.

I suppose with the passage of time and the development of new procedures and ideas, that under a demand led system there might today be less than 19... but equally, there might be more? Who can say.

One thing you can ABSOLUTELY say is that you aren't demonstrating today because everything is rosy in the garden, you are attempting to save a substantial part of the only proper hospital in the area.

Anyway... A question...

If we left the NHS and its provision of services to the government for long enough, would we end up with one massive hospital, the size of Leamington Spa... In Leamington Spa, because that is the centre of England and obviously, the most rational place to build our superb NHS facility...? Logic would suggest that "yes" is the answer.

Finally... The reason that I mentioned your inability with the language is because there is a significant difference between "your" and "you're", and you hadn't understood the content of my post either.
@londonlive, if you take the trouble to read and comprehend the words and the resulting substance of what I wrote, you will deduce that I support the efforts of everyone that are attempting to keep Lewisham Hospital as it is... I wish it was even better in fact, I use it myself. The point I was making about the NHS is that it is a crap idea, and the execution of that idea has proven to be as poor as every other attempt by government (anywhere in the world) to create a command economy, it simply isn't possible. As an example... In 1947 (let's call that BNHS (before the NHS)), there were 19 hospitals in the area covered by Lewisham and the three failing hospitals that are being discussed. Let's pick an individual hospital... St. Nicholas in Plumstead... I choose this because my father his sister, and (obviously) his parents lived in Plumstead during his childhood... BNHS... They were poor people, even though the parents both worked at the Woolwich Arsenal. All members of the family needed to visit the hospital at least once... due to motorcycle accident, difficult pregnancy, scarlet fever and diphtheria. All of those stays and treatments were free, because they were poor people, and the hospital management decided that to be the case. St. Nicks was the local hospital, it belonged to the people of Plumstead, and the people of Plumstead financed it voluntarily and willingly... it was a highly valued amenity, which until the NHS came along was a given. 1948, NHS is born... Somewhere around 1980, St. Nicks closes its doors. There were hundreds of medical facilities around the country, all of which had been the result of much experimentation about what worked and what didn't... Some of the schemes failed and some survived, the failures were replaced with new ideas... ...One such scheme was called something like the Peckham experiment or some such (the BBC is always waffling on about how great it was)... This is what is called "a demand" economy... People demanded a service and local business, charity, church, college would find a way of meeting the demand. So much so, that there were... 19... Nineteen hospitals within the area now covered by the four that are currently under discussion, and are not that good. They were ALL viable and none were constantly under threat of closure. I suppose with the passage of time and the development of new procedures and ideas, that under a demand led system there might today be less than 19... but equally, there might be more? Who can say. One thing you can ABSOLUTELY say is that you aren't demonstrating today because everything is rosy in the garden, you are attempting to save a substantial part of the only proper hospital in the area. Anyway... A question... If we left the NHS and its provision of services to the government for long enough, would we end up with one massive hospital, the size of Leamington Spa... In Leamington Spa, because that is the centre of England and obviously, the most rational place to build our superb NHS facility...? Logic would suggest that "yes" is the answer. Finally... The reason that I mentioned your inability with the language is because there is a significant difference between "your" and "you're", and you hadn't understood the content of my post either. Polly Staight
  • Score: 0

2:04am Sun 27 Jan 13

londonlive says...

nearly right all the time wrote:
How is this all Paid for?

Oh yes TAX PAYERs

I forgot we had the olympics,
jubilee!

Now we cant pay for A&Es,Fire stations
or Police
Well done Middle England!
What is your point? You don't want the Olympics, the Jubilee, the NHS, Fire Stations or Police? Which of these are you choosing to object to? Which of these don't you use or feel part of?

Give reasons for your answer...
[quote][p][bold]nearly right all the time[/bold] wrote: How is this all Paid for? Oh yes TAX PAYERs I forgot we had the olympics, jubilee! Now we cant pay for A&Es,Fire stations or Police Well done Middle England![/p][/quote]What is your point? You don't want the Olympics, the Jubilee, the NHS, Fire Stations or Police? Which of these are you choosing to object to? Which of these don't you use or feel part of? Give reasons for your answer... londonlive
  • Score: 0

2:45am Sun 27 Jan 13

londonlive says...

Polly Staight wrote:
@londonlive, if you take the trouble to read and comprehend the words and the resulting substance of what I wrote, you will deduce that I support the efforts of everyone that are attempting to keep Lewisham Hospital as it is... I wish it was even better in fact, I use it myself.

The point I was making about the NHS is that it is a crap idea, and the execution of that idea has proven to be as poor as every other attempt by government (anywhere in the world) to create a command economy, it simply isn't possible.

As an example...

In 1947 (let's call that BNHS (before the NHS)), there were 19 hospitals in the area covered by Lewisham and the three failing hospitals that are being discussed.

Let's pick an individual hospital... St. Nicholas in Plumstead... I choose this because my father his sister, and (obviously) his parents lived in Plumstead during his childhood...

BNHS...

They were poor people, even though the parents both worked at the Woolwich Arsenal. All members of the family needed to visit the hospital at least once... due to motorcycle accident, difficult pregnancy, scarlet fever and diphtheria. All of those stays and treatments were free, because they were poor people, and the hospital management decided that to be the case.

St. Nicks was the local hospital, it belonged to the people of Plumstead, and the people of Plumstead financed it voluntarily and willingly... it was a highly valued amenity, which until the NHS came along was a given.

1948, NHS is born... Somewhere around 1980, St. Nicks closes its doors.

There were hundreds of medical facilities around the country, all of which had been the result of much experimentation about what worked and what didn't... Some of the schemes failed and some survived, the failures were replaced with new ideas...

...One such scheme was called something like the Peckham experiment or some such (the BBC is always waffling on about how great it was)...

This is what is called "a demand" economy...

People demanded a service and local business, charity, church, college would find a way of meeting the demand. So much so, that there were...

19... Nineteen hospitals within the area now covered by the four that are currently under discussion, and are not that good. They were ALL viable and none were constantly under threat of closure.

I suppose with the passage of time and the development of new procedures and ideas, that under a demand led system there might today be less than 19... but equally, there might be more? Who can say.

One thing you can ABSOLUTELY say is that you aren't demonstrating today because everything is rosy in the garden, you are attempting to save a substantial part of the only proper hospital in the area.

Anyway... A question...

If we left the NHS and its provision of services to the government for long enough, would we end up with one massive hospital, the size of Leamington Spa... In Leamington Spa, because that is the centre of England and obviously, the most rational place to build our superb NHS facility...? Logic would suggest that "yes" is the answer.

Finally... The reason that I mentioned your inability with the language is because there is a significant difference between "your" and "you're", and you hadn't understood the content of my post either.
I'll repeat my point: Why are you so against something that has been designed to help you?

A couple of other points:

"St. Nicks was the local hospital, it belonged to the people of Plumstead, and the people of Plumstead financed it voluntarily and willingly..". But by who? Not the whole community surely? In that era it would no more have "belonged to the people of Plumstead" than the local Tesco "belongs to the people of Plumstead" today. It would have been run as a business. If at that point the local area happened to have a philaphropist behind it (you don't say anything about that), all well ahd good, but who wants to place trust in that? You're making a misrepresentation of history. Are you really suggesting that the Plumstead area had no decent health provision since 1948?

Second, the phrase: "They were poor people, even though the parents both worked at the Woolwich Arsenal. All members of the family needed to visit the hospital at least once... due to motorcycle accident, difficult pregnancy, scarlet fever and diphtheria. "

You depict this as it is something out of Dickens. This is recent history we are talking about and thank god people have fought to bring about better conditions and better services for people in the intervening years. You would no doubt prefer a pre-1948 Britain would you? Would they prefer what came later? I somehow suspect they would have done.

No doubt you think the NHS, The Apollo Programme, The Olympics, The Channel Tunnel, Air Travel, Television, the BBC, public services or anything that involves you collectively engaging with other people is a waste of time and money. I'm amazed on you're on here as it wouldn't have come about without public investment. Don't agree? Well sorry and all that. What about Police Stations closing? And Ideas on that? Park Maintenance? Schools?

As for the "Command" economy: There is absolutely nothing wrong with a command economy as long as it is doing the right the right thing, and people influence it - which is what you should do.
[quote][p][bold]Polly Staight[/bold] wrote: @londonlive, if you take the trouble to read and comprehend the words and the resulting substance of what I wrote, you will deduce that I support the efforts of everyone that are attempting to keep Lewisham Hospital as it is... I wish it was even better in fact, I use it myself. The point I was making about the NHS is that it is a crap idea, and the execution of that idea has proven to be as poor as every other attempt by government (anywhere in the world) to create a command economy, it simply isn't possible. As an example... In 1947 (let's call that BNHS (before the NHS)), there were 19 hospitals in the area covered by Lewisham and the three failing hospitals that are being discussed. Let's pick an individual hospital... St. Nicholas in Plumstead... I choose this because my father his sister, and (obviously) his parents lived in Plumstead during his childhood... BNHS... They were poor people, even though the parents both worked at the Woolwich Arsenal. All members of the family needed to visit the hospital at least once... due to motorcycle accident, difficult pregnancy, scarlet fever and diphtheria. All of those stays and treatments were free, because they were poor people, and the hospital management decided that to be the case. St. Nicks was the local hospital, it belonged to the people of Plumstead, and the people of Plumstead financed it voluntarily and willingly... it was a highly valued amenity, which until the NHS came along was a given. 1948, NHS is born... Somewhere around 1980, St. Nicks closes its doors. There were hundreds of medical facilities around the country, all of which had been the result of much experimentation about what worked and what didn't... Some of the schemes failed and some survived, the failures were replaced with new ideas... ...One such scheme was called something like the Peckham experiment or some such (the BBC is always waffling on about how great it was)... This is what is called "a demand" economy... People demanded a service and local business, charity, church, college would find a way of meeting the demand. So much so, that there were... 19... Nineteen hospitals within the area now covered by the four that are currently under discussion, and are not that good. They were ALL viable and none were constantly under threat of closure. I suppose with the passage of time and the development of new procedures and ideas, that under a demand led system there might today be less than 19... but equally, there might be more? Who can say. One thing you can ABSOLUTELY say is that you aren't demonstrating today because everything is rosy in the garden, you are attempting to save a substantial part of the only proper hospital in the area. Anyway... A question... If we left the NHS and its provision of services to the government for long enough, would we end up with one massive hospital, the size of Leamington Spa... In Leamington Spa, because that is the centre of England and obviously, the most rational place to build our superb NHS facility...? Logic would suggest that "yes" is the answer. Finally... The reason that I mentioned your inability with the language is because there is a significant difference between "your" and "you're", and you hadn't understood the content of my post either.[/p][/quote]I'll repeat my point: Why are you so against something that has been designed to help you? A couple of other points: "St. Nicks was the local hospital, it belonged to the people of Plumstead, and the people of Plumstead financed it voluntarily and willingly..". But by who? Not the whole community surely? In that era it would no more have "belonged to the people of Plumstead" than the local Tesco "belongs to the people of Plumstead" today. It would have been run as a business. If at that point the local area happened to have a philaphropist behind it (you don't say anything about that), all well ahd good, but who wants to place trust in that? You're making a misrepresentation of history. Are you really suggesting that the Plumstead area had no decent health provision since 1948? Second, the phrase: "They were poor people, even though the parents both worked at the Woolwich Arsenal. All members of the family needed to visit the hospital at least once... due to motorcycle accident, difficult pregnancy, scarlet fever and diphtheria. " You depict this as it is something out of Dickens. This is recent history we are talking about and thank god people have fought to bring about better conditions and better services for people in the intervening years. You would no doubt prefer a pre-1948 Britain would you? Would they prefer what came later? I somehow suspect they would have done. No doubt you think the NHS, The Apollo Programme, The Olympics, The Channel Tunnel, Air Travel, Television, the BBC, public services or anything that involves you collectively engaging with other people is a waste of time and money. I'm amazed on you're on here as it wouldn't have come about without public investment. Don't agree? Well sorry and all that. What about Police Stations closing? And Ideas on that? Park Maintenance? Schools? As for the "Command" economy: There is absolutely nothing wrong with a command economy as long as it is doing the right the right thing, and people influence it - which is what you should do. londonlive
  • Score: 0

8:05am Sun 27 Jan 13

Polly Staight says...

I have read your "criticism" and come to the conclusion "londonlive" that you are a total idiot.

I could spend many an hour writing sense here and still you wouldn't be able to comprehend.

I suppose that history has become so modern that education and comprehension is a thing from the Dickensian past as well.

Apparently, the highly political decision of some Welsh windbag over seventy years ago, that actually had NOTHING to do with health care and everything to do with class hatred, is sacrosanct.

Do me a favour?
I have read your "criticism" and come to the conclusion "londonlive" that you are a total idiot. I could spend many an hour writing sense here and still you wouldn't be able to comprehend. I suppose that history has become so modern that education and comprehension is a thing from the Dickensian past as well. Apparently, the highly political decision of some Welsh windbag over seventy years ago, that actually had NOTHING to do with health care and everything to do with class hatred, is sacrosanct. Do me a favour? Polly Staight
  • Score: 0

10:03am Sun 27 Jan 13

nearly right all the time says...

For the past 20-30yrs different govt
have spent taxpayers money like
drunken sailors.

now we have to shut A&Es, Fire stations
Police offices,

if we had not just spent £9.3BILLION
on 16days of sport we just might be able
to afford the important things!
For the past 20-30yrs different govt have spent taxpayers money like drunken sailors. now we have to shut A&Es, Fire stations Police offices, if we had not just spent £9.3BILLION on 16days of sport we just might be able to afford the important things! nearly right all the time
  • Score: 0

11:01am Sun 27 Jan 13

Polly Staight says...

@nearly right all the time...

Indeed sir...

But look on the bright side, if it hadn't been for the Olympics, I wouldn't have learned that the only radio station that wasn't trumpeting the latest Olympian feat, was Radio 3.

In that process, I discovered that I quite liked some classical music, and that their 8:00am news (lies and propaganda) broadcast is precisely 2 minutes long and then forgotten.

Excellent stuff.
@nearly right all the time... Indeed sir... But look on the bright side, if it hadn't been for the Olympics, I wouldn't have learned that the only radio station that wasn't trumpeting the latest Olympian feat, was Radio 3. In that process, I discovered that I quite liked some classical music, and that their 8:00am news (lies and propaganda) broadcast is precisely 2 minutes long and then forgotten. Excellent stuff. Polly Staight
  • Score: 0

11:14am Sun 27 Jan 13

londonlive says...

nearly right all the time wrote:
For the past 20-30yrs different govt
have spent taxpayers money like
drunken sailors.

now we have to shut A&Es, Fire stations
Police offices,

if we had not just spent £9.3BILLION
on 16days of sport we just might be able
to afford the important things!
Well, set up a Blog or a web site and then you can write about it till you're hearts content. Better still, why not try influencing things? Or reading some facts? Or do you prefer to result to just rely on predudice and insults?
[quote][p][bold]nearly right all the time[/bold] wrote: For the past 20-30yrs different govt have spent taxpayers money like drunken sailors. now we have to shut A&Es, Fire stations Police offices, if we had not just spent £9.3BILLION on 16days of sport we just might be able to afford the important things![/p][/quote]Well, set up a Blog or a web site and then you can write about it till you're hearts content. Better still, why not try influencing things? Or reading some facts? Or do you prefer to result to just rely on predudice and insults? londonlive
  • Score: 0

8:33am Mon 28 Jan 13

Margaret Smith says...

Labour Party Caused this mess with trhe PFI policy that is leading to crises across the UK for the NHS and Schools. Why have none our our Labour Politicians Apologised, Why have none of our 3 Labour MPs not signed the all party early day Motion calling for an end to PDFI or signed the People before Profit number 10 petition opposing PFI. Why will the Labour party not confirm that if they win in 2015 they will reject the Kershaw plans? Labour is using the Hospital to win votes, but has no intention to end PFI or save our Hospital i hope Labour voters see the Lewisham Labour Party for what it is..
Labour Party Caused this mess with trhe PFI policy that is leading to crises across the UK for the NHS and Schools. Why have none our our Labour Politicians Apologised, Why have none of our 3 Labour MPs not signed the all party early day Motion calling for an end to PDFI or signed the People before Profit number 10 petition opposing PFI. Why will the Labour party not confirm that if they win in 2015 they will reject the Kershaw plans? Labour is using the Hospital to win votes, but has no intention to end PFI or save our Hospital i hope Labour voters see the Lewisham Labour Party for what it is.. Margaret Smith
  • Score: 0

10:14am Mon 28 Jan 13

Polly Staight says...

In 1940 ish, this was NOT a party political issue, there was a plan (insurance based) to introduce a nationally level playing field for health services. There was already a good coverage of friendly societies and other arrangements like the Peckham and Tredegar social(ist) systems.

By 1948, the Labour party had queered the pitch so much by turning its introduction into a full blooded class hatred issue, and eventually they managed to bring the monopolistic GMC on side, with a couple of sweeteners for the doctors..

Over the years there have been various attempts to reform some of the thousands of iniquities that such vicious campaigns throw up...

...Including Labour's PFI schemes and the famous post code lottery... Isn't this just like the variability that led to politicians nationalising it in the first place?

And let us not forget my exchange with "londonlive" above, when I described the massive amount of asset stripping and destruction of real hospital services that has taken place in the very area we are discussing.

This is and has always been the policy of the NHS to centralise services, and where there were 19 manageable hospitals dotted around the area... i.e. local and where people want them... There are now four incredibly expensive set-ups, and I do include Lewisham in this, even though it is good value compared to the other three.

Anyway, it has gone beyond being a party political issue, it is now a matter of life and death, and my opening comments above, though I fully realise that they are invitingly divisive, do point to the problem... It isn't the Tory's, or Labour (forget about the Lib Dims)...

...It is about our health needs, it is quite clear that the NHS does not work, otherwise this discussion and this campaign would not be taking place... As it has been doing in one guise or another for long as I can remember...

As far back as 1960, Enoch Powell wrote a highly respected manual on the best way to run the hospital system (he was secretary of state for health at the time), and the same document was still being used until a few years back as the "reference".

Could we not learn something from the German or the French system? I realise that a system like that used by the Americans is not acceptable, the monopoly of the AMA and the insurance companies is so complete, that it is the most expensive and least efficient system in the world, where nearly half of the people are inadequately covered.

Anyway, this is nothing to do with "people before profit" or any such party political, class based ranting and the like. We must accept the fact that a command led system (particularly when it is aimed at something as expensive as healthcare) just does not work.

This current problem, however it is solved, or whatever the odious Hunt (Bottomley's little nephew) decides will only throw up more of the same... endlessly into the future...

There is not one single politician that has got honest motives when around the NHS.
In 1940 ish, this was NOT a party political issue, there was a plan (insurance based) to introduce a nationally level playing field for health services. There was already a good coverage of friendly societies and other arrangements like the Peckham and Tredegar social(ist) systems. By 1948, the Labour party had queered the pitch so much by turning its introduction into a full blooded class hatred issue, and eventually they managed to bring the monopolistic GMC on side, with a couple of sweeteners for the doctors.. Over the years there have been various attempts to reform some of the thousands of iniquities that such vicious campaigns throw up... ...Including Labour's PFI schemes and the famous post code lottery... Isn't this just like the variability that led to politicians nationalising it in the first place? And let us not forget my exchange with "londonlive" above, when I described the massive amount of asset stripping and destruction of real hospital services that has taken place in the very area we are discussing. This is and has always been the policy of the NHS to centralise services, and where there were 19 manageable hospitals dotted around the area... i.e. local and where people want them... There are now four incredibly expensive set-ups, and I do include Lewisham in this, even though it is good value compared to the other three. Anyway, it has gone beyond being a party political issue, it is now a matter of life and death, and my opening comments above, though I fully realise that they are invitingly divisive, do point to the problem... It isn't the Tory's, or Labour (forget about the Lib Dims)... ...It is about our health needs, it is quite clear that the NHS does not work, otherwise this discussion and this campaign would not be taking place... As it has been doing in one guise or another for long as I can remember... As far back as 1960, Enoch Powell wrote a highly respected manual on the best way to run the hospital system (he was secretary of state for health at the time), and the same document was still being used until a few years back as the "reference". Could we not learn something from the German or the French system? I realise that a system like that used by the Americans is not acceptable, the monopoly of the AMA and the insurance companies is so complete, that it is the most expensive and least efficient system in the world, where nearly half of the people are inadequately covered. Anyway, this is nothing to do with "people before profit" or any such party political, class based ranting and the like. We must accept the fact that a command led system (particularly when it is aimed at something as expensive as healthcare) just does not work. This current problem, however it is solved, or whatever the odious Hunt (Bottomley's little nephew) decides will only throw up more of the same... endlessly into the future... There is not one single politician that has got honest motives when around the NHS. Polly Staight
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree