Nicola Sturgeon, SNP Health Secretary, speaking in June 2007: “I would have no hesitation in paying tribute to the work of the previous administration in this area. In terms of the whole population, the health improvement agenda has been very effective over the past 10 years.”
Shona Robison, SNP Minister for Public Health, speaking in January 2009: “One of the reasons Labour was flung out of office in Scotland was its abysmal failure on health.”
Matt Qvortrup: Numpty....
47 minutes ago
Oh dear, this is getting a bit silly AM2.
Selective quoting, dodgy comparison, how much lower can you stoop.
Labour's Failure in Health
a. 1300 Less Beds over 5 Years
b. Centralising Programme that did not listen to Local Concerns
c. Rates of Obesity increasing
d. Waiting Lists growing despite the use of 'off' lists to disguise the true figures.
e. High incidence of hospital acquired bugs only now being investigated on by a public enquiry sponsored by the SNP.
f. Hospitals built under PFI which have been proven to have been incredibly bad value for money, hairmyres, edinburgh royal infirmary, etc.....
g. Complete failure to tackle youth binge drinking and it's cost to society
h. Introduction of prescription charges
i. Introduction of hospital car park charges.
j. Failure to democratise local health boards
A very damning report card indeed. and all done
Clearly in Nicola Sturgeon is of the opinion that work done by the previous administration was good at the time.
It would appear that Shona Robison is of a different opinion and believes that it is one of the reasons why the SNP were voted in.
Nationalists in ability to express different view point shocker!! Phone the fire brigade, the police and the SAS!
Didn't Gordon Brown declare an end to boom and bust? Why didn't the Red Sea part and peace be established in the holy land as a result? In addition why aren't geese laying golden eggs? Or will this be a source of future hyperinflationary policies? (quantative easing)?
A somewhat partial quote. Why don't you post the whole reply?
'Health is a key part of it. In other areas we are not doing too badly. I want to signal a renewed commitment to not just improving health in Scotland but to tackling health inequalities. I would have no hesitation in paying tribute to the work of the previous administration in this area. In terms of the whole population, the health improvement agenda has been very effective over the past 10 years. (But) while we have been improving the health of the population as a whole, health inequalities are getting worse. That is something that we really need to take a long hard look at ... Alcohol is crying out for more of a focus...'
Members of a government are supposed to represent a united front and position.
Both quotes were partial. But I linked to the fuller contexts. Nothing sinister in that.
I do wish you'd tackle the issues rather than just try to discredit anyone raising them.
Wardog:
Your "how much lower can you stoop" rhetoric is unwelcome and does nothing to bolster your pitifully weak points.
The Lab/Lib government did not introduce prescription charges, but even if they had done so there is a legitimate and coherent view that they (along with hospital parking charges) are necessary and/or in some form for the common good.
Value for money under PFI is also a matter of opinion; its opponents tend to underestimate the value of the maintenance and operational aspects of the contracts, while its proponents tend not to want to talk about cost-cutting by private contractors who are working to letter of ill-conceived contracts.
Rates of obesity are increasing almost everywhere.
1300 less beds "over 5 years". Which five years? What about the other three years when there was a Lib/Lab executive?
"Failure to democratise local health boards" - wow, propaganda at it's best! There is some considerable opinion that elections to health boards may, in fact, result in less effective decision-making.
Hospital bugs - Nicola Sturgeon has been heavily criticised over that, as you must surely know, yet you spin it in your favour.
Centralising/local concerns. Again, expert opinion is divided on this question. You present it as if your perspective is the only possible "right" one.
And so on. While you may have a valid point or two, they are obscured by your copious spin coupled with your inability or unwillingness to begin to even acknowledge alternative opinions.
SU I don't think you 'get' the issue. It would be amazing if Labour had not improved healthcare given that in their terms of office the Scottish Parliament's budget doubled - and most of that went to the NHS.
But the point Nicola Sturgeon was making is that health inequalities persist, indeed have grown worse. We all know the stats - the 20 year+ life expectancy gap between rich and poor areas that are only miles apart.
This is what the SNP has chosen to address. It's why they have brought a whole load of other areas, like housing, regeneration, poverty, sport into the health agenda. It's a recognition that the determinants of health are not simply physical and healthcare should be about prevention as well as cure.
Whether this will work - well, who knows? It cannot be measured as easily as the number of beds. It is a long term objective. But I think Labour members if they were honest would say it is the right direction to go in, even as they make hay with some of the more unpopular elements e.g. alcohol.
Perhaps Labour can take credit for fixing the NHS after the ravages of the Tory years, but fixing the nation's health is a much bigger task.
Erm Am2, Labour are bringing forward a private members bill to scrap ALL hospital parking.
It will cost a reputed £50million to achieve that on 3 PFI hospitals, the SNP managed it for £4.5M on THIRTEEN other hospitals.
it's fair to say that PFI is a complete waste of money and is simply another form of privatisation.
Kinda looks incredibly silly now that we own the banks that lent this money to private firms to carry out PFi;'s in the first place wouldn't you say.
The last 5 years AM2, you know the ones when Labour really bollocked up the NHS.
I wouldn't expect you to understand the democratic deficit at the heart of Health Boards, however, one thing is for sure, wait and see the story's fly once they get access to the accounts and PFI shenanigans.
The only people criticising the SNp over Hospital bugs funnily enough is Labour. It is the SNP that is bringing forward a public enquiry into them and I suspect a specific one in due course for vale of Leven.
Unfortunately you have failed to make any vlaid points, but thanks for acknowledging that you are wrong in your original headline.....
And you have the cheek to say that I'm spinning.
How very very dare you ;-)
AM2?
HEADLINE: MRSA rates at record low
"...Hospital bugs - Nicola Sturgeon has been heavily criticised over that, as you must surely know, yet you spin it in your favour......"
Wrong again my long nosed friend
Long nosed friend. That would be a barely veiled way of calling me a liar.
It's not a headline, at least not a media headline. It's an SNP government press release. And the criticism was very real.
But far be it from me to return your baseless insult.
Rates of hospital 'superbugs' are falling in Scotland, according to latest statistics published today, with MRSA levels at their lowest level since reporting began.
The figures from Health Protection Scotland show rates of clostridium difficile (C.diff) are also down.
Among the reports' findings are:
* MRSA rates are at their lowest level since monitoring began in 2003
* MRSA rates have fallen for six consecutive quarters
* C.diff levels are down 17 per cent on the previous quarter and two per cent on the same quarter last year
Wardog:
What was the point of that post? I provided a link to the press release in my previous comment. Why paste a block of its text?!
Anyway, while MRSA certainly seems to be have been on the wane for some time, C.diff being down 17% on the previous quarter but only 2% on the same quarter in 2007 is in no way conclusive. The C.diff monitoring programme is barely two years old. It's too early to start extrapolating trends.
Point of information: the MRSA programme started in 2001, not 2003.
erm no AM2.....
The current scheme was modified in Scotland, from January 2003, data from an additional source, namely blood culture isolates of MRSA referred to the Scottish MRSA Reference Laboratory, were also collected, the two datasets being combined and reconciled....
This enhancement resulted in an approximately 15% increase in the rate of MRSA bacteraemia ascertained. Although the mandatory reporting scheme should have included all cases of MRSA bacteraemia, the increased ascertainment noted in the combined surveillance programme indicates that this was not the case.
Source: Health Protection Scotland. Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus in Scotland. Changes to the Surveillance System and Report of Health Protection Scotland's (HPS) Scottish Surveillance of Healthcare-Associated Infection Programme (SSHAIP)
Can you post an apology for posting the wrong information for any concerned readers of your blog?
Thanks for the apology in advance.
I wasn't talking about the modification. Two posts back you said "monitoring began in 2003", which is incorrect. It began in 2001, which fact I stated merely for the record.
Your petulant demand for an apology isn't appreciated. Save your juvenile nonsense for the Scotsman or somesuch forum, please.