What Will A Future Labour Government Do With the NHS?

A Debate Held by Newham Compass in association with Newham Fabians (Guest Post)

By Susan Masters (Labour Council Candidate in Newham, Compass Member, Founder Member of Newham Save Our NHS) – twitter @newhamsue

"The night could have been so different.

If Debbie Abrahams – Parliamentary Private Secretary to Andy Burnham - hadn’t been held up, delayed by a crucial lobbying bill vote. If she had kicked off rather than arriving to find the course of debate already charted. If the night’s audience hadn’t been such an articulate, well-informed collection of health campaigners, the discussion might have stayed on brief.

As it was, by the time the evening’s concluding speaker arrived, the penny had dropped: Where the NHS is concerned, the question isn’t what a Labour government might be able to do in 2015 (if elected). The sad reality is that if we don’t fight to preserved our NHS services now, if we don’t share ideas and resources, stand together as unionists, activists and local service users, there will not be an NHS to work with when Ed moves in to number ten.

Set against the background of the Barts Trust’s colossal debts, huge planned cost-savings, on-going staff review and rumoured attacks on local A&E services, Unison Regional organiser Jay Williams kicked off the debate in Debbie’s absence and took us to the very heart of the experience of being an NHS worker in the times of the coalition. Starting with the well-worn current strains on the NHS – an aging, growing population; poor public nutrition and a growth in mental health issues – he charted the way our present government have cast such problems as a crisis in the NHS for which the only remedies are private health insurance and privatisation, where to Jay the problem is largely one of poor management. We heard about workers seeing their jobs rebanded and downgraded, while the pay protection policies designed to slow the impact were whittled away and the lure of comparatively lucrative foreign pay deals brought about a skills drain in areas such as midwifery. 10% of vacant posts are left unfilled with temporary staff covering at far greater cost. We learned of the huge cuts to ambulance services and the failure of the 111NHS number.

To say the picture was bleak would be an understatement and yet Jay’s speech was no study in fatalism and there were plenty of suggestions of ways to fight back. His ideas of lobbying the CCG or contacting union officials at Newham General, might have raised wry smiles among local health campaigners who’ve hit walls down such routes, while his pleas to lobby our council for changes in public policy might have felt somewhat belated when faced with a local authority that’s delivered everything from free school meals to primary school students and free swims for pensioners, to initiatives like ‘Every Child A Sportsperson’. But where one contact, route or idea was deemed unsatisfactory, another was soon on hand.

Hurrying in on the tail end of Jay William’s opener, you had to feel for Debbie Abrahams. I should stress that to have Andy Burnham’s articulate and committed Parliamentary Private Secretary attend at all was a real coup for Newham Compass. Not just because she’s an MP at the very heart of our Shadow health team, but because you can’t argue with the dedication of someone who entered politics not as a career move but as a response to the privatisation she’d witnessed as chair of Rochdale Primary Health Trust – a post she resigned, giving up on a successful career in health, to fight for the core values of the NHS within the Labour Party.

Her description of Labour’s plans was both clear and comprehensive: A commitment to the World Health Organisation’s definition of health as a holistic mix of the physical, mental and social; a desire to repeal the Health and Social Care Act 2012, but to avoid further top-down reorganisations in favour of far greater integration coupled with a bigger role for local authorities; public health initiatives to tackle drinking and nutrition, and the abolition of zero hours contracts…All really good stuff (if we can keep the NHS alive long enough!). The only moment of controversy lay in Debbie’s mention of solutions to paying for social care, whether through a Dilnott style cap or a levy on estates – moves questioned by one attendee as an affront to the original notion of the NHS as providing care free at the point of delivery from cradle to grave.

As the evening drew to a close, however, it felt like the real winners were local health campaign group ‘Newham Save Our NHS’, strongly represented at the debate. If you’d like to join them and help defend East London’s Health Services now, do get in touch and check out their website at newhamsaveournhs.weebly.com or attend one of their monthly meetings at the café in Central Park, East Ham.

(hat tip picture Darren Steer @SirSteer)

What will a future Labour Government do with the NHS?

Newham Compass and Fabians will be holding this important debate on Tuesday 10 September 2013 at 7.30pm at West Ham Supporters Club. I will be at TUC congress and will miss it - which is a shame.

"Trident: What its for?" Newham Compass and Fabian Debate

This picture is from the debate organised on Trident by Newham Compass and Fabians last week.

Kate Hudson from CND and Labour Party Councillor (and NEC member) Luke Akehurst debated the proposed Trident Nuclear submarine and missile programme.

Former Newham Cllr (and budding author) Graham Lane (middle of photo) chaired the meeting.

Luke went first and started by arguing that he is not here to argue for the use of nuclear weapons rather it's role in deterring such war. While there is no current threat Trident is an insurance policy for the next 40 years, since who knows what threats we will face during this time interval.

He agrees that the world would be a much better place if there was no nuclear weapons but believes that this is more likely to happen if there was multilateral rather than unilateral disarmament. Since no one would care if we disarmed by ourselves. If you have a deterrence you can negotiate it away but if you haven't got it & then find you need it to face a threat then it will be too late.

Trident lite nuclear solutions make pre-emptive strikes more likely & more dangerous than not having nukes. The total cost of Trident should be viewed over its entire lifetime - 0.3% of total government budget.

Kate was not having any of this and costed Trident at £3 billion per year for 30 years. The equivalent of 30,000 new homes being built each year which could provide 60,000 jobs.

She believes that even the UK Military top brass are worried about opportunity cost of Trident and that the UK cannot have Trident and be an useful military ally. Former Labour minister Des Brown thinks we cannot afford Trident. She points out that even Tony Blair admitted that that having Trident is not about defense but about national status.

Having any nuclear weapons is just too dangerous. If we think we need them then so will other countries.

The debate and Q&A that followed was civilised and courteous unlike similar debates I remember from my youth. As an aside I pointed out in the Q&A that myself and Terry Paul (a Newham Councillor who was also present) were "cold war warriors" who had spent part of our misspent youth in the 1980s as members of the British Territorial Army. Who at the time were trained to defend the German plains and stop the possible advance of hordes of Soviet tanks.

At the time I didn't think we would have much success in this role nor the reassurance we were given that don't worry if nuclear weapons were being used in the battlefield because as long as we had 18 inches of earth above our trenches, we were perfectly safe from anything apart from a direct hit! ...Yeah.

"An Economy for One Nation: How Progressive can a Future Labour Government be"?

Picture of East Ham MP Stephen Timms and UNISON Head of Local Government Heather Wakefield (Chair Christopher Owens on right) at the Newham Compass & Fabians debate on how radical the next Labour Government should be.  This was held last month at West Ham FC supporter’s club.

Stephen spoke first on the central policy of the next Labour Government must be to cut unemployment. The Tory cuts had failed and resulted in no growth. Many people now beginning to realise that the cuts are not working.

The deficit had not been caused by overspending but by the collapse in the economy due to the financial crisis. He enjoyed seeing even Tories criticising government policies. If Labour are elected then there are limits to what we can do. Employment is key to fighting poverty. Labour will offer a guaranteed job for 6 months.

Heather introduced herself as a Chelsea FC season ticket holder who was pleased to be at West Ham! She was going to be more idealistic and talk about values. Privatisation of public services had led to reduced wages and badly run, inefficient services and greater income inequality.

We need gender equality as well as satisfying and socially useful work. Real workplace democracy. We need a partnership at work, a new deal with unions.

There needs to be a new attitude to taxes, ask what the economy is for and who benefits from it? A Green investment bank to make Government offices and homes energy efficient. Deal with tax havens. Raise a Robin Hood (or rather Maid Marian) Tobin Tax. Reform Council tax. Make sure that there is a minimum income for all.

We have the most expensive child care in Europe apart from Switzerland. Women suffer the most in terms of jobs and pay from Austerity. There has to be a Keynesian economic programme, we could invest in new homes. Ask should we have low pay or a living wage. Why do we subsidise Tesco with tax credits?

Worse privatisation was in social care. Dominated by big companies making massive profits out of poor quality care and also schools meals.

In the Q&A I asked the question that in line with Heather’s remarks about rethinking our attitude to taxes, we ought to be pointing out that getting the unemployed into work will cost money and that we have to accept that all of us will have to pay more tax in return for quality public services. 

Heather was very positive in her reply while Stephen was a little more circumspect.

"The Future of London Government" Newham Compass & Fabians

 

Tonight in West Ham FC Supporters club, Green Street (which is actually in East Ham) there was a debate led by London Assembly member, Val Shawcross with Emma Sweeney and Ted Flanagan from the new Queen's Park Parish Council in the London Borough Westminster.

 

The topic was "The Future of London Government" Chaired by Unmesh Desai, organised jointly by Newham Compass and Fabians. Follow my twitter feed at lbncompass. 

 

Val spoke first about how do we sustain and revitalise democracy in London? The Liberal Democrats have been discredited by dropping their core social beliefs in the unsuccessful pursuit of changes that would have benefited them politically (PR and reform of Lords), While the Tories pursue a culture of secrecy especially in the Metropolitan Police and the London Fire Brigade.

 

We need to start a dialogue in the Labour Party about democratising and self government, look at the voluntary sector, social enterprises, mutuals and real local control of the NHS. Tories are about privatisation while we should be driving our democratic tentacles into private sector and promoting "responsible capitalism". This change should not be at the expense of workers terms and conditions.

 

Ted and Emma spoke about their experiences in Queens Park setting up a Parish Council in a mixed income ward in Westminster with houses worth a £million + and a 1960s Council estate with the worse child poverty rate in Europe. They got the idea from a journalist when their local forum had its funding cut in 2010. 68% of the ward voted to set up the Parish, which will receive around £45 per year from each household in the ward (collected by Westminster on top of Council tax). This will raise £180k per year which will be spent on extra community services and events as decided by the local elected parish councillors. Not replace existing borough services.

 

Like I think nearly everyone present I think this is a really interesting idea and needs following. I'm a little sceptical to be honest since I have seen all sorts of centralised then decentralised then recentralised community governance models in my time, come and go. Yet Ted and Emma seem very confident that this time it should be different.

 

In the Q&A I warned Val that while the Voluntary sector does many good things there are also appalling governance in many such organisations which needs addressing. I pointed out the Metropolitan Housing Robbery.  She accepted that far more needs to be done to improve the way that these organisations conduct themselves and we need to start a debate in the Labour Party on how to do this.