THE UK Health Secretary, Wes Streeting, must immediately desist from claiming that, and using the phrase “the NHS is broken” ("NHS care can be a ‘death sentence’ for some patients - Wes Streeting", heraldscotland, October 21).
He is being very rude and most offensive to all who work in and around the organisation. He is also fundamentally incorrect.
It certainly isn’t perfect, no organisation of its size and complexity is, and its inefficiencies - systems, management and operational - require to be addressed, which won't be an easy task, but in my experience over the last 18 months, and that of others I know, his claim is wholly baseless.
To address “it is broken” he now announces a one-year “consultation” period to identify what aspects of the NHS should be focused on to drive improvement as part of his10-year improvement plan.
First, what was he doing in his role over several years as shadow health secretary if, now that he is in the hot seat, he needs 12 months to consult? Was he asleep? He should already know now what areas to focus on.
Secondly, any plan he embarks on should deliver the operational improvements his consultation period might identify in a lot less than 10 years.
Shareholders in any large, complex private organisation would most certainly not accept a 10-year performance improvement plan, nor should the British public.
Also, he presumes that his party will still be in control over the next 10 years, and presumably that he will still be Health Secretary. From his party's performance since it took office only a few months ago, he is presumptuous indeed.
He should desist from being rude and demotivating to NHS staff, and get a move on with what we pay him to do.
Paul McPhail, Glasgow.
Read more letters
- Gordon Brown was one of the worst PMs Britain has ever had
- Glasgow is two cities: one for the middle-class and one for the rest
Labour cuts worse than Tories'
THE Labour Party promised “change” in the run-up to the General Election. Change, or lack of it, has resulted in an unprecedented attack on the poorest and most vulnerable in our society.
Pensioners on an income of less than £12,000 per annum are denied their winter fuel payments while the cost of heating rises again.
Retention of the Tories’ cruel two-child benefit cap ensures that many of the poorest families in the country remain in poverty.
Retaining the Tories’ plans for reform of disability benefits threatens the weakest and less able in our society.
Not increasing personal tax allowances and suggesting that this will be maintained beyond 2028 breaks Labour's election promise not to increase tax rates for working people. For every extra pound earned, 20 pence will be removed via income tax. Wage increases for many workers will take them into higher tax bands, thus vastly increasing their tax rate.
This from a Labour Government! Even the Tories didn’t implement some of the cuts being proposed by Labour.
If this is not austerity, perhaps Anas Sarwar can enlighten us to what austerity is.
David Howie, Dunblane.
Get the Letter of the Day straight to your inbox.
Remove bishops from the Lords
WHILE the introduction of legislation to remove the remaining 92 hereditary peers from the House of Lords is to be welcomed, a very easy next step would be to remove the 26 Church of England bishops. Known as the Lords Spiritual, these individuals have an automatic right to sit and vote in the House of Lords.
It is indeed bizarre in the 21st century to have a legislative body that, outside Iran, is the only legislature in the world which automatically includes religious representatives. There is no representation from Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales. The bishops also clearly represent nothing other than the Church of England, an anachronism in an increasingly secular society.
The role of the Lords Spiritual is active and influential in law-making. Not only do they speak, vote, and serve on committees like other peers, bishops are subject to a number of privileges. They enjoy privileged speaking rights over other peers; when a bishop wants to speak, others are expected to give way.
There should be no reserved seats in Parliament for any one religion. The current position is a clear violation of the principle of freedom of religion and belief and equal treatment before the law. With the hereditary peers removed, the continued inclusion of the bishops becomes even more bizarre.
Alex Orr, Edinburgh.
How to fix energy system
GUY Stenhouse ("Labour has just done something about energy that proves we’re better together", The Herald, October 19) makes a sound case for England, Scotland and Wales being better together when we consider our electricity supply.
Historically the creation of the Great British electricity grid in 1936 and the nationalised electricity industry in 1947 transformed our electricity supply and distribution for the better. The price of electricity in 1947 was approximately 19p per kWh and this price was reduced to around 11p per kWh by 1990 when plans to privatise the industry were put in place. The low price in 1990 was achieved by the nationalised electricity industry which had an ethos of working in the national interest and for the public good. Britain owned the electricity assets and British engineering firms designed, built and manufactured the electricity plants. Up until 1990 Britain was considered, by many people, to have the best electricity system in the world.
What went wrong? I suggest that privatisation of the electricity industry has resulted in the total loss of control of our generating and distribution systems in Britain which has resulted in increased electricity prices over which the UK Government has no control. To recover from this situation I suggest the Labour Government should do three things. First, take the electricity sector of the National Grid Company back into public ownership, and secondly staff GB Energy with experienced engineers who can plan and design what is required for the industry. Thirdly, commission GB Energy to build, own and finance all electricity infrastructure with money ring-fenced from the Treasury to be repaid from a proportion of the price of electricity, not from taxation. This I suggest is the only way to lower the electricity price.
Charles Scott, Edinburgh.
We must have regional pricing
LISTENING to UK Energy Minister Michael Shanks on Laura Maciver’s BBC Scotland Sunday Show (October 20) was painful. It’s clear the former secondary school teacher is in way over his head.
He absurdly claimed that GB Energy would generate electricity early next year and that it will bring down energy bills. False. GB Energy is a shell company for foreign investors to exploit Scotland’s renewables. It won’t produce a milliwatt of energy and it won’t reduce bills.
To illustrate how dysfunctional the UK energy system is, since Labour came to power, more than £100 million has been added to UK energy bills to pay Scottish wind farms to halt production.
The reason? It’s expensive to move electricity from where it’s produced to where it’s needed and under the existing centralised market structure, if an offshore Scottish wind farm produces more than the network can handle, it’s paid to shut off while a gas-fired plant down in England gets paid to switch on. That’s crazy. It’s estimated that this market failure will cost £3.7 billion by 2030.
The solution? Regional energy pricing. Instead of one price for the whole UK, each region would have a different price based on its level of supply and demand. Consumers would pay less for electricity if the power is generated near them and more if the power is generated further away. Because Scotland has renewables coming out of its ears, regional pricing would be a huge benefit and Scots would pay the lowest electricity prices in Europe.
Regional pricing would also boost the Scottish economy. When Sweden introduced regional pricing, it attracted more than €70bn of industrial investment. Because energy-intensive industries want to find the cheapest energy sources, they’d flock to Scotland if we had regional pricing, generating lots of jobs.
Another thing Sweden has that the UK no longer does is a state-owned energy company. But Sir Keir won’t re-nationalise energy. He wants it to remain in the hands of multinational energy giants and foreign governments.
If Scots are sick and tired of the UK plundering their resources and then lying about it, the only solution is to end the failing Union.
Leah Gunn Barrett, Edinburgh.
Royal mistake
I SEE that the Aboriginal Senator Lidia Thorpe was shouting "you are not my king" in the Australian Parliament House and was "swiftly removed" ("‘You are not my king’ - Australian senator accuses King of ‘genocide’", heraldscotland, October 21).
I'm pretty sure they removed the wrong person.
Ken Mackay, Glasgow.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel