Reply With QuoteI fecking despair at times.Originally Posted by adz-a32 wrote on Sun, 04 January 2015 06:46
| + Visit Cardiff FC for Latest News, Transfer Gossip, Fixtures and Match Results |
Nothing more to be said.Trust me Colonel, I know what I'm talking about here. It's the law.
I fecking despair at times.
I reckon it's all above boardTrust me Colonel, I know what I'm talking about here. It's the law.Are you a Freemason too?
It is a fact that a private firm would have the aim to maximise profit. The aim of this privatisation (I know - an exaggeration but still) is to provide competition but as far as I am concerned, the NHS is built on a system of collaboration and specialisation (ie via Centres of Excellence) than by competition. This privatisation is fragmenting the NHS and leading to a leekage of public money.It is sad to see the NHS on its knees. 1) A cheaper bid was denied and 2) A private firm would take public money in profit, which imho is a waste of finite public money.
If more info is given out, then I will change my position appropriately. I am just commenting using the info given, so it may not be 100% accurate.Trust me Colonel, I know what I'm talking about here. It's the law.Are you a Freemason too?
the days must fly by reading such fascinating literatureIt is sad to see the NHS on its knees. 1) A cheaper bid was denied and 2) A private firm would take public money in profit, which imho is a waste of finite public money.Anything to please the Tory donors though.
Ain't too long: http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2013/257/pdfs/uksi_201302 57_en.pdfIt is sad to see the NHS on its knees. 1) A cheaper bid was denied and 2) A private firm would take public money in profit, which imho is a waste of finite public money.Anything to please the Tory donors though.Another one spouting off about things they have absolutely zero knowledge about, making themselves look rather stupid, all for the sake of making a false political sound bite. Pathetic.
Not the only contract
http://nhap.org/join-us-nhs-fightback/facts-fingertips/
http://www.hulldailymail.co.uk/NHS-privatisation-fears-Healt hshare-wins-pound-8/story-22049360-detail/story.html
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/jul/02/cancer-care-n hs-outsourcing-ccgs-unison-virgin
http://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk/news/11692330.NOT_AGAIN __Fears_East_Lancashire_hospitals_could_lose_MORE_ services_a s_4_contracts_go_to_tender/?ref=rss
Am I being too cynical?Trust me Colonel, I know what I'm talking about here. It's the law.Are you a Freemason too?
One final point, are you aware BUPA, as an example, is a non profit making organisation and that any surplus generated will be reinvested into providing healthcare. Private sector does not have to mean profit making.It is sad to see the NHS on its knees. 1) A cheaper bid was denied and 2) A private firm would take public money in profit, which imho is a waste of finite public money.Anything to please the Tory donors though.
Then I take back my "discrimination" claims.
When the NHS buys goods it cannot reclaim VAT. When it buys a service ( as in this case) it can reclaim the 20% VAT. In practice this can make private bids effectively 20% cheaper than they seem when this is considered. It has lead to a growth in private companies being involved in supplying services to the NHSTrust me Colonel, I know what I'm talking about here. It's the law.Are you a Freemason too?TH63 knows what he's about on this. It's nothing to do with Tories, or Labour for that matter, more to do with Europe
I've worked on a NHS tender (getting companies to bid on a service on behalf of the NHS)- there are various factors involved some of which were :-
Service Delivery Times - including any penalty clauses
Total Cost of Ownership - which included the cost of machinery as well as total staff costs - including NI, pension etc
Plus there were economies of scale to be achieved - alot of the tasks could be automated with software tools the NHS did not currently use or have skills in.
Without knowing the exact criteria that was set here - no one knows the exact answer - which is why you have people reacting to the headline rather than the factual detail
I did say that the comparison is not 100% accurate though. I think that with public services, there should be more transparency and the people should be involved more in decision making.It is sad to see the NHS on its knees. 1) A cheaper bid was denied and 2) A private firm would take public money in profit, which imho is a waste of finite public money.Anything to please the Tory donors though.Another one spouting off about things they have absolutely zero knowledge about, making themselves look rather stupid, all for the sake of making a false political sound bite. Pathetic.
The provision of healthcare is an exempt item for VAT. Any front end service provider would not charge or recover VAT.
See VAT 701/57
The contract process is pretty robust Adz and will ensure that the best overall service provider is chosen. That has to be best for the patient in the long term. What does it matter if a healthcare provider generates a profit if the quality and provision of healthcare has improved due to the increase in competition?It is sad to see the NHS on its knees. 1) A cheaper bid was denied and 2) A private firm would take public money in profit, which imho is a waste of finite public money.Anything to please the Tory donors though.Another one spouting off about things they have absolutely zero knowledge about, making themselves look rather stupid, all for the sake of making a false political sound bite. Pathetic.I fecking despair at times.
If however a private company provided a service which included the provision of medicines the VAT could be reclaimed.
Competition in my opinion varies from market to market. With the NHS, it is based on collaboration and specialisation. I think that competition would ruin that.It is sad to see the NHS on its knees. 1) A cheaper bid was denied and 2) A private firm would take public money in profit, which imho is a waste of finite public money.Anything to please the Tory donors though.Another one spouting off about things they have absolutely zero knowledge about, making themselves look rather stupid, all for the sake of making a false political sound bite. Pathetic.I fecking despair at times."Absolutely zero knowledge"? What a lame assumption.
To reclaim VAT the organisation has to be VAT registered. This rule is applicable to all service providers including the NHS - where a private supplier can recover VAT via partial recovery so can the NHS.The provision of healthcare is an exempt item for VAT. Any front end service provider would not charge or recover VAT.
That's your opinion Adz, these contracts will be designed to include specialisation and collaboration provisions. See the staffs cancer tender link above. It's about putting patients first and ensuring joined up thinking from end to end.It is sad to see the NHS on its knees. 1) A cheaper bid was denied and 2) A private firm would take public money in profit, which imho is a waste of finite public money.Anything to please the Tory donors though.Another one spouting off about things they have absolutely zero knowledge about, making themselves look rather stupid, all for the sake of making a false political sound bite. Pathetic.I fecking despair at times."Absolutely zero knowledge"? What a lame assumption.I have read the Health and Social Care Act 2012 (SI 257) and it basically says that there should be no discrimination between private and NHS providers. We can see that the NHS bid was cheaper, so based on what we know, it is discrimination against the NHS provider.
Lisvaneblue It does not work like that, any company registered for VAT including the NHS offsets vat paid out to what it receives, so it is reclaimed. It's the law
Isnt it more important the contract is offered to the best supplier for the good of the NHS, no matter where it comes from?
The day we need to start worrying is the day the uninsured people are turned away when sick.
Talking absoloute crap about something you dont know about.The tender was under ojeu ,which is pretty detailed and above board and cannot be twisted for suppliers.If the best overall bid wasnt accepted the legal ramifications would have been a nightmare. Just because the NHS bid was cheaper doesnt mean it was the best value for money.
As a public body, they're not allowed to go for anything other than best VFM which is the way it should be.It is sad to see the NHS on its knees. 1) A cheaper bid was denied and 2) A private firm would take public money in profit, which imho is a waste of finite public money.
Do you base every purchase on price?Trust me Colonel, I know what I'm talking about here. It's the law.
Posting Permissions
