'Hypocrite' Ken Livingstone Admits to using Private Healthcare.

[gnvqsos]

I agree Shogun, i have voted labour all my life and i always will, but if i had the money i would pay for private medical treatment, can any body give me a good reason why i shouldn't, i can understand why members of the labour party get some stick though for going private

 

I can-its because private health care means people often undergo needless episodes of minor surgery simply to fund the lifestyle of egotistical private surgeons.Such talents should be used for more fundamental operations.

[Shogun]

As I said early on I am a ardent Labour supporter and I believe in the NHS and am proud of what Labour did for the working man,Mr Livingston has a good job and can afford to go to a private hospital good for him if I was him I would do the same,I don't agree with private health care but when it comes to your health that is a different matter,it is impossible for the NHS to give the same kind of care to the amount of people that use the NHS,I would not call him a hypocrite at all if I was to have vote on him I would look at the whole picture like what has Boris Johnson done while he has been there and what did Mr Livingston when he was leader,the NHS use private hospitals for their waiting time overflow, most of the surgeons and consultants work for both the private and NHS it is just the private heath care don't have as many patients to deal with and give a more one on one service, the treatment is no different to the NHS they are both governed by the care quality commission.

[mj.scuba]

Has he advocated the abolition of private health care?

 

No, but has argued against private sector involvement in the NHS, whilst he has been using private sector providers himself. Easy to see why he is being called a hypocrite.

 

Maybe he doesn't want the general public to have it as good.

[puisseguin]

I don't agree with private health care but when it comes to your health that is a different matter

 

Can you run that one by me again?

[kidley]

No, but has argued against private sector involvement in the NHS, whilst he has been using private sector providers himself. Easy to see why he is being called a hypocrite.

 

Maybe he doesn't want the general public to have it as good.

 

is that what an hypocrite is, so all the millionaires in government should live in social housing or they cannot advocate more social housing?

[JFKvsNixon]

As did the Major administration, as did the Thatcher administration.. ditto Wilson, ditto Heath, Wilson again, Macmillan, all the way back to Attlee when it was introduced.

 

And it's never worked. It still isn't working. At what point do people begin to realise that throwing more money at the NHS does not solve its problems?

 

I'm sorry but you are wrong, the Major and Thatcher governments never increased the spending on the same level as the Blair government did. Before Blair we spent less on our health care than our European partners did, he brought us in line.

 

Nobody is suggesting that throwing money at the NHS will solve all of it's problems, but the money has helped and will help the NHS come to terms with one of it's main problems, which is often a lack of resources. I am not stating that reforms are not needed, in any massive organisation there is always a need for constant reforms.

 

One of the main challenges facing the developed world is how to come to terms with health spending inflation.

[mj.scuba]

So a politician who wants more council housing should live in a council house?

 

The analogies are not getting any better. He would have to be living in a privately owned house whilst arguing against private sector house building within the housing market, limiting everybody else to social housing whilst he enjoys a private pad.

[puisseguin]

The analogies are not getting any better. He would have to be living in a privately owned house whilst arguing against private sector house building within the housing market, limiting everybody else to social housing whilst he enjoys a private pad.

 

I wouldn't bother. The folk in London seem to have seen through Ken pretty well. There are just a few die hards on here who are desperate to try to justify his self serving attitudes.

 

I'm sorry but you are wrong, the Major and Thatcher governments never increased the spending on the same level as the Blair government did. Before Blair we spent less on our health care than our European partners did, he brought us in line.

 

Nobody is suggesting that throwing money at the NHS will solve all of it's problems, but the money has helped and will help the NHS come to terms with one of it's main problems, which is often a lack of resources. I am not stating that reforms are not needed, in any massive organisation there is always a need for constant reforms.

 

One of the main challenges facing the developed world is how to come to terms with health spending inflation.

 

It is a pity that the Blair Government spent so much more than the country could afford, ran up such massive debts and ran such a huge budget deficit that budgets are now having to be cut to pay for it all.

[wednesday1]

I wouldn't bother. The folk in London seem to have seen through Ken pretty well. There are just a few die hards on here who are desperate to try to justify his self serving attitudes.

 

 

 

It is a pity that the Blair Government spent so much more than the country could afford, ran up such massive debts and ran such a huge budget deficit that budgets are now having to be cut to pay for it all.

 

 

As you well know, Penguin, public spending was actually less as a proportion of GDP, under Labour, than it had been under the useless disaster that was Major. It was the bailout of the Bankers, which was fully supported by the Cons which ran up the budget deficit.

Nice try though!

[liam1412]

The Labour party has lost all its credibility with many decidedly dodgy affairs. The MP's expenses for one.

 

A once great party is the shell of its former self. Full of Champagne Charlies, career politicians and charlatons.

 

Anyone who still votes Labour has to be a mug.

 

Surely even someone who dislikes labour so much can see that the cons are up to there old tricks already. "We are all in it together" unless you are rich!

 

I don't think labour were without faults during the latter period of their last term, but I'd have odds on that the cons would have done mostly the same. And the lefts argument that labour crippled the economy. The banks crippled the economy, and that would have happened regardless of who was in power.