There should be a return to vocational colleges, with an emphasis on contact with local employment.
This was proposed by James Dyson in setting up just such a college in Wiltshire, the Dyson Institute, in 2017.
Youngian wrote: ↑Fri Aug 15, 2025 5:58 pm If universities in Cambridge had massive brains like Dyson and thought that one up, the city might now have a vigorous science and tech private sector.Ha ha.There should be a return to vocational colleges, with an emphasis on contact with local employment.
This was proposed by James Dyson in setting up just such a college in Wiltshire, the Dyson Institute, in 2017.
Our programme is an innovative, four-year integrated MEng Engineering degree, which offers you the opportunity to study a rigorous academic degree alongside practically applying this knowledge to real engineering problems at Dyson. You’ll learn from our specialist academics and Dyson engineers in world-leading facilities, all on Dyson’s technology campus in Malmesbury, Wiltshire.He actually uses the word "degree".
The Labour right wants Wes Streeting in No 10. Why? What does he really stand for?I think Streeting being moved might make the government more popular, but he's not been objectionable so far in the role. Got quite a bit of extra money out of Reeves, settled the long running doctors' dispute, has some good ideas about treating more people outside hospitals.
Oliver Eagleton
The way the health secretary has overseen the NHS give clues as to what a Streeting premiership might look like
Just over a year after Keir Starmer entered Downing Street, his political survival already looks uncertain. Perennially indecisive, unpopular with the public and unable to pass major legislation without rebellions, the prime minister has reportedly been put “on notice” by senior figures within his party. Speculation about a potential successor is mounting.What a fair minded summary, thanks, Oliver. No mention of inheriting a shit sandwich, having to spend a load of time on Trump. Just useless old Keir, doesn't know what he's doing, eh?
What would Labour’s dominant faction – the neo-Blairite right – look for in a candidate? Their best bet would be an effective operator who doesn’t carry too much political baggage, a decent communicator, free of Starmer’s stumbling reticence, and a committed partisan of their cause: namely the free market and a strong stateStarmer isn't particularly free market (apart from on housing provision). There's the industrial policy, workers rights, mirroring Europe on nearly everything, taxes going up. Sure, Reeves talks some strongly deregulatory stuff, but the Eagleton view that Labour are mad neoliberals is probably not shared by most investors. She says this stuff because she wants people to invest. More generally, isn't it time some people got over Tony Blair?
When Starmer’s leadership of the Labour party was on the brink during the Beergate scandal, Peter Mandelson is said to have canvassed the Labour frontbench to anoint Streeting. “In the longer term,” briefed one party source, “Wes is their guy, not Keir.”Beergate was obvious bollocks to everyone apart from the Tory press, and the maddest Corbynite. All you had to do to know this was look at the actual rules from the time. Did Oliver really think that meeting up for work during the (checks notes) local elections was dodgy?
True to his word, Streeting has helped to normalise the state of perma-austerity at the health department, which will receive only an extra 2.8% annually in real terms over the coming years: less than the long-term historical norm of 3.7%, and far below the average increase of 6.8% under New Labour. This is nowhere near enough to solve the perpetual crisis in the sector, let alone make any real improvements in the quality of care.Real terms rise isn't "austerity". Did I almost read a compliment to New Labour there? Waiting lists seem to be coming down. Is that a "real improvement"?
Without meaningful investment, the levers that Streeting can pull to realise his goals are limited. There is reorganisation through measures such as the summary abolition of NHS England and mass job cuts.NHS England was set up by Andrew Lansley, as part of reforms nobody now supports. Is "reorganization" bad now? We'll have to see how it goes, but the idea behind abolishing NHS England seems sound. Mass job cuts? So when I look at NHS headcount, it'll be falling, will it? Those real terms spending rises suggest the opposite to me.
There is techno-optimism, allowing AI companies such as Palantir to run parts of the ailing serviceTechnology? Shit, that shouldn't be anywhere near the health service. What is exactly are Palantir going to be doing? Are robots going to be doing heart surgery on the cheap? No, it's patient records.
Streeting has been working hard to ensure that “more treatments can be delivered through the independent sector”, as an official briefing put it. Under his watch, an even greater portion of the NHS – including, potentially, sensitive patient data – is being handed over to profit-making companies.We've got massive waiting lists, and no spare capacity. How are you supposed to deal with that? And the "sensitive data" isn't being handed over- I guess that's the point of "potentially" there. What's being handed over is data without personal details. There is massive potential for this general data to be analyzed to provide insights into how to do care best.
His plan to set up 300 “neighbourhood health hubs” is powered by corporate finance, in what is shaping up to be a frame-by-frame replay of the disastrous PFI initiatives of the 2000s.The link to "corporate finance" there is to a site that's bigging up MMT. That's not a credible source. PFI, you might recall, was about very long term financing deals for hospitals and the like which the public sector often built massively over budget and failed to maintain. There was a reasonable idea somewhere in it, but the Treasury was outwitted by the PFI providers who covered the risk at very high cost. It's pretty hard to see a neighborhood hub, with a load of services that in some cases already exist outside hospitals anyway, as suitable for PFI. I suspect that the hubs may be built with private money and rented, but that isn't PFI. It's much easier to manage from the government point of view.
Research shows that the effect of these policies is to worsen health inequality. But this does not seem to concern the minister.You've just made the policy up yourself. So I'm not surprised he isn't concerned with it. Anyway, they have lots of private health in other countries in Western Europe. They must be dropping like flies.
In recent weeks, resident doctors rejected his notion that “reform” alone will magically resolve the service’s deep-rooted problems of under-resourcing and understaffing. They refused to accept a pay deal that would amount to a 21% reduction in their salaries since 2008, and instead made a principled case for wage restoration.The link on this 21% reduction is to... the BMA. The figure has been widely debunked. The offer this year (not pulled out of Streeting's arse, but from the review body) is above inflation. That's indeed a route to pay restoration, after the big increase last year. For which Streeting gets no credit in this article.
Streeting’s main interest is in positioning himself as a crusader on behalf of the establishment rather than fixing the service he oversees. He is also keenly aware of the populist appeal of his rhetoric at a time when support for the doctors’ struggle is in decline.Why might the public be pissed off with doctors? It's a mystery. "Populist" though. The Eagleton Left don't use that word when they're claiming public support for their positions, funny that. You don't get "Corbyn's main interest is positioning himself as...", do you?
The other front on which Streeting has been fighting is the culture war. He has imposed a permanent ban on puberty blockers for trans children – despite a wealth of dissenting expert opinion including that of the British Medical Association, which disputes the scientific basis of the prohibition –The implication here is of Streeting doing this on the initiative of JK Rowling. The body that decided it was the Commission on Human Medicine, who reviewed the evidence, dissenting and all. I accept this is a controversial subject and people can reach different conclusions, but let's present what happened honestly, eh?
The irony, of course, is that while Streeting styles himself as the man to beat Nigel Farage, his politics is one of deference to big business, clampdowns on trans rights and incendiary rhetoric to provoke the left. These features are more typically associated with reactionary populism than with social democracy. Streeting’s ascent reflects the fact that, in today’s Labour party, the former is cannibalising the latter.A load of doctors calling a deeply unpopular strike aren't "the left". Anywhere that sets budgets, social democratic or not, will have industrial disputes, often very heated. Do these people actually know that private provision of health is very common in social democracies? Deference to business, is it?
the prime minister has reportedly been put “on notice” by senior figures within his party.
Sky News' deputy political editor Sam Coates said his sources - a member of the government and a prominent politician - have "put Sir Keir Starmer on notice".A prominent politician, what does that mean? Member of the government is somebody not in the Cabinet, by the sound of it.
Tubby Isaacs wrote: ↑Tue Aug 19, 2025 6:44 pm The Government haven't done anything flagrantly bad for a couple of days. Most people would praise Starmer's Ukraine efforts, which we probably wouldn't be getting from Zack Polanski or Corbyn or whoever the Guardian are preparing to endorse. So what do we get today?Eagleton also wrote a book on Starmer. Well I say book it's more a bitter hatchet job.
Terry Eagleton's son sticking it to the Health Secretary.
The Labour right wants Wes Streeting in No 10. Why? What does he really stand for?I think Streeting being moved might make the government more popular, but he's not been objectionable so far in the role. Got quite a bit of extra money out of Reeves, settled the long running doctors' dispute, has some good ideas about treating more people outside hospitals.
Oliver Eagleton
The way the health secretary has overseen the NHS give clues as to what a Streeting premiership might look like
What's the point of this article?
Just over a year after Keir Starmer entered Downing Street, his political survival already looks uncertain. Perennially indecisive, unpopular with the public and unable to pass major legislation without rebellions, the prime minister has reportedly been put “on notice” by senior figures within his party. Speculation about a potential successor is mounting.What a fair minded summary, thanks, Oliver. No mention of inheriting a shit sandwich, having to spend a load of time on Trump. Just useless old Keir, doesn't know what he's doing, eh?
Speculation is mounting, he said, as if it's nothing to do with people like him. What is "unable to pass major legislation without rebellions" supposed to mean? That was the point of maximizing seats, not piling up votes in places they were going to win anyway.
So Starmer's bad. Presumably if he resigns, there'd be a leadership election, right? Members get to vote for who they want. So probably not Streeting then. Why are we talking about him? Oh.
What would Labour’s dominant faction – the neo-Blairite right – look for in a candidate? Their best bet would be an effective operator who doesn’t carry too much political baggage, a decent communicator, free of Starmer’s stumbling reticence, and a committed partisan of their cause: namely the free market and a strong stateStarmer isn't particularly free market (apart from on housing provision). There's the industrial policy, workers rights, mirroring Europe on nearly everything, taxes going up. Sure, Reeves talks some strongly deregulatory stuff, but the Eagleton view that Labour are mad neoliberals is probably not shared by most investors. She says this stuff because she wants people to invest. More generally, isn't it time some people got over Tony Blair?
Hang on what's this?
When Starmer’s leadership of the Labour party was on the brink during the Beergate scandal, Peter Mandelson is said to have canvassed the Labour frontbench to anoint Streeting. “In the longer term,” briefed one party source, “Wes is their guy, not Keir.”Beergate was obvious bollocks to everyone apart from the Tory press, and the maddest Corbynite. All you had to do to know this was look at the actual rules from the time. Did Oliver really think that meeting up for work during the (checks notes) local elections was dodgy?
What does "anoint Streeting" mean? What does "canvassed the front bench" mean? Why does Mandelson (who seems to be doing a good job with Trump, I grudgingly admit) matter anyway? People like this always talk about politics and the media being superficial, and this is the sort of stuff they hang articles on?
Streeting got some useful extra money for Health, didn't he? I thought I read some economists say that anyhow. Or did I?
True to his word, Streeting has helped to normalise the state of perma-austerity at the health department, which will receive only an extra 2.8% annually in real terms over the coming years: less than the long-term historical norm of 3.7%, and far below the average increase of 6.8% under New Labour. This is nowhere near enough to solve the perpetual crisis in the sector, let alone make any real improvements in the quality of care.Real terms rise isn't "austerity". Did I almost read a compliment to New Labour there? Waiting lists seem to be coming down. Is that a "real improvement"?
I'm sure Streeting, like anyone else, would have liked more money to throw around. If he's as madly ambitious as we're told, surely, the best route to Downing Street would be to do exactly this, wouldn't it? What does "normalize perma-austerity" mean? The Health Secretary is supposed to spend his time slagging off the Chancellor for not giving him enough money?
Without meaningful investment, the levers that Streeting can pull to realise his goals are limited. There is reorganisation through measures such as the summary abolition of NHS England and mass job cuts.NHS England was set up by Andrew Lansley, as part of reforms nobody now supports. Is "reorganization" bad now? We'll have to see how it goes, but the idea behind abolishing NHS England seems sound. Mass job cuts? So when I look at NHS headcount, it'll be falling, will it? Those real terms spending rises suggest the opposite to me.
There is techno-optimism, allowing AI companies such as Palantir to run parts of the ailing serviceTechnology? Shit, that shouldn't be anywhere near the health service. What is exactly are Palantir going to be doing? Are robots going to be doing heart surgery on the cheap? No, it's patient records.
Streeting has been working hard to ensure that “more treatments can be delivered through the independent sector”, as an official briefing put it. Under his watch, an even greater portion of the NHS – including, potentially, sensitive patient data – is being handed over to profit-making companies.We've got massive waiting lists, and no spare capacity. How are you supposed to deal with that? And the "sensitive data" isn't being handed over- I guess that's the point of "potentially" there. What's being handed over is data without personal details. There is massive potential for this general data to be analyzed to provide insights into how to do care best.
His plan to set up 300 “neighbourhood health hubs” is powered by corporate finance, in what is shaping up to be a frame-by-frame replay of the disastrous PFI initiatives of the 2000s.The link to "corporate finance" there is to a site that's bigging up MMT. That's not a credible source. PFI, you might recall, was about very long term financing deals for hospitals and the like which the public sector often built massively over budget and failed to maintain. There was a reasonable idea somewhere in it, but the Treasury was outwitted by the PFI providers who covered the risk at very high cost. It's pretty hard to see a neighborhood hub, with a load of services that in some cases already exist outside hospitals anyway, as suitable for PFI. I suspect that the hubs may be built with private money and rented, but that isn't PFI. It's much easier to manage from the government point of view.
Research shows that the effect of these policies is to worsen health inequality. But this does not seem to concern the minister.You've just made the policy up yourself. So I'm not surprised he isn't concerned with it. Anyway, they have lots of private health in other countries in Western Europe. They must be dropping like flies.
In recent weeks, resident doctors rejected his notion that “reform” alone will magically resolve the service’s deep-rooted problems of under-resourcing and understaffing. They refused to accept a pay deal that would amount to a 21% reduction in their salaries since 2008, and instead made a principled case for wage restoration.The link on this 21% reduction is to... the BMA. The figure has been widely debunked. The offer this year (not pulled out of Streeting's arse, but from the review body) is above inflation. That's indeed a route to pay restoration, after the big increase last year. For which Streeting gets no credit in this article.
Streeting’s main interest is in positioning himself as a crusader on behalf of the establishment rather than fixing the service he oversees. He is also keenly aware of the populist appeal of his rhetoric at a time when support for the doctors’ struggle is in decline.Why might the public be pissed off with doctors? It's a mystery. "Populist" though. The Eagleton Left don't use that word when they're claiming public support for their positions, funny that. You don't get "Corbyn's main interest is positioning himself as...", do you?
The other front on which Streeting has been fighting is the culture war. He has imposed a permanent ban on puberty blockers for trans children – despite a wealth of dissenting expert opinion including that of the British Medical Association, which disputes the scientific basis of the prohibition –The implication here is of Streeting doing this on the initiative of JK Rowling. The body that decided it was the Commission on Human Medicine, who reviewed the evidence, dissenting and all. I accept this is a controversial subject and people can reach different conclusions, but let's present what happened honestly, eh?
The irony, of course, is that while Streeting styles himself as the man to beat Nigel Farage, his politics is one of deference to big business, clampdowns on trans rights and incendiary rhetoric to provoke the left. These features are more typically associated with reactionary populism than with social democracy. Streeting’s ascent reflects the fact that, in today’s Labour party, the former is cannibalising the latter.A load of doctors calling a deeply unpopular strike aren't "the left". Anywhere that sets budgets, social democratic or not, will have industrial disputes, often very heated. Do these people actually know that private provision of health is very common in social democracies? Deference to business, is it?
What a pathetic hatchet job. And I don't even like Streeting. In summary, "this bloke who's unlikely to lead his party because he's not very popular would do this, based on some stuff I've bullshitted about". You can see why he presented it like this, because this would be laughed out of town as straight analysis of health polic.
Lord Darzi insists that polyclinics will offer "a more personalised service". This is nonsense: in the enormous new centres we are less likely to be able to see the same GP, and more likely to get lost in the system. A recent paper in the British Medical Journal reveals that "patients in small practices rate their care more highly in terms of both access and continuity", and that small practices "achieved slightly higher levels of clinical quality than larger practices". The centres will be built not where they are most convenient for patients but - as Darzi revealed to the Commons health committee - where the NHS happens to own land. If you live in a village or a distant suburb and depend on public transport, as many elderly and sick people do, visiting the doctor could take all day. Ara Darzi is the new Dr Beeching, shutting down the branchlines of our primary health service.I'm guessing Darzi didn't say they'd only go on places where the NHS owned spare land. Nor did anyone suggest that every GP surgery was going to be shut down, which seems to be the implication. And what about the extra services provided in a clinic compared with a GP surgery? No positives in the GP being literally down the corridor from the people doing it, rather than in a hospital miles away? That sounds exactly like a more personalized service to me, Monbiot choosing to answer a different point purely about GPs. That people tend to like their small GPs doesn't really surprise me, just like they like their small primary schools (don't get me started on those). But aren't there efficiency arguments too?
in the enormous new centres we are less likely to be able to see the same GP, and more likely to get lost in the system.I mean, really? Isn't this what's always happened, in small practices too? "I'm afraid Dr X is booked up today. Would you like to see Dr Y?" At which you either give up, ring back tmrw for Dr X or see Dr Y today. Monbiot sounds like a pub bore moaning about how you can't even see the doctor these days, and aren't policemen short?
During a parliamentary debate launched by the Conservatives last week, health secretary Alan Johnson claimed three times that this policy is not being imposed on PCTs. "There is no national policy for replacing traditional GP surgeries with health centres or, indeed, polyclinics"; "we are not specifying polyclinics as any part of the exercise"; "[the Tories say] we are imposing a system of polyclinics throughout the country. We are not." Three times, in other words, he misled the House. The letter sent by the Department of Health in December ordered that "each PCT will be expected to complete procurements during 2008/09". In a parliamentary answer in February, health minister Ben Bradshaw confirmed that "every PCT in the country will be procuring a new ... health centre during 2008-09". A press release published by the Labour party on April 15 confirmed that the new centres would be built "in every town and city". I hope MPs demand that Alan Johnson apologise to parliament.Is there actually a contradiction here? Johnson was replying to an exaggerated campaign that your GP was being replaced with a polyclinic. Isn't he saying it isn't national policy to do that, which it wasn't?
Labour is now the party with the highest level of support from GPs, at 18.4%, up from 14.2% at the last general election. But the findings suggest its support is also in decline – a similar poll by GP magazine in 2012 found 25% of GPs planned to vote Labour in 2015.Was Labour's record on health really that bad?
GP support for the Conservative party has collapsed since the 2010 general election. GP’s latest poll found 45% of GPs backed the party in 2010, but just 16.6% planned to do so again in 2015.
Liberal Democrat support fared badly too, with 23.6% of GPs saying they voted for the party in 2010, but just 4.3% planning to do so in 2015.
Andy McDandy wrote: ↑Wed Aug 20, 2025 3:51 pm Think you've nailed it there. This is just whingeing about change.Dislike of change, which is always bad, is quite a thing in left journalism. We know the left would nationalize lots of stuff (and there's a strong argument for that with lots of outsourcing) but beyond that, what? How would they organize stuff? Makes me think that too little thought is given to making things work. Whatever they did, they'd get lots of the same stuff that Labour get now- local campaigners on their case about basically changing anything.
- By Bones McCoy
Ex-priest found guilty of 17 indecent assaults […]
