Forget the trivial bickering; have politicians been inside the NHS recently?

I have not commented on much lately due to other family commitments and to the lack of newsworthy events.  It seems that politics has become extremely lame of late.  The 10p tax vote was a joke.  I still don’t understand why some think that it makes the lowest paid workers worse off while it helps those who are well off.  I agree that those at the bottom are worse off, but everyone is affected, even if not as bad.

It seems the media is wrapped up with this Andy Coulson business and I can’t see the significance of it.  Meanwhile, the MPs second jobs list has been published somewhere.  I don’t know where to find it, but the BBC has printed a select few.  And, guess what?  It’s just as bad as the other non-stories.  Who cares if an MP filled out a survey and received a token payment?  Who cares if someone gave a paid speech, even if the pay was a jar of honey?  Has it gotten to the point that we have to look over the MPs’ shoulders to make sure they’re doing their jobs?  Politicians are always asked on their opinions or to give talks here and there.  What I would be interested in finding out is whether a doctor MP is working full-time as a doctor while still trying to serve his constituency.  Is there someone working as an executive in a company and still acting as MP?  Those are “second jobs”.  If you want to know whether someone gets extra pay for their work, then just say so.  Don’t categorise it as a “second job”.  And, for the record, unless it is a real “second job”, I don’t care what these MPs get for doing all these other extracurricular activities, unless the majority of their time is spent doing something other than their real “job”, if that’s what you want to call it.

But, while the media and the politicians are having their fun with trivialities, I’d like to point out some major issues that affect the common person.  I have had no contact with the NHS until very recently.  My mother-in-law fell while walking her dog.  He lurched after something and pulled her down.  She was very much alone in the commons and initially thought it was not a big deal.  However, when she tried to get up, her body wouldn’t respond.  She was lucky that someone nearby heard her crying for help.  It turned out, she fractured her wrist and her hip.

On visits to the hospital, we could not help making comparisons between the NHS and the private hospital and to US hospitals.  First of all, there seemed to be a sad lack of staffing.  She was moved from A&E to the wards and was literally ignored, except for occasional blood pressure readings.  She was made to starve in anticipation of surgery, but no consultant surgeon came to see her until evening (she had arrived early in the morning).  She was supposed to have had a urinary catheter, but it was not placed for 12 hours.  The poor woman could not get out of bed and had IVs dripping in her.  She’s an elderly lady, so bladder control does become an issue.  When we pointed it out to a nurse, he stood there joking with an aide, then finally turned to tell us it was supposed to have been done in A&E.  Don’t take this the wrong way, but the nurses did not speak English as a first language and it made communication difficult.  The consultant finally arrived and explained that she needed surgery (as if that wasn’t obvious).  He would not have said anything further and was happy to leave after five minutes had we not pressed him with questions. 

She had surgery the next day and was not seen by any members of the family due to the timing of the surgery and the fact that she was out from anaesthesia.  The day after, she looked groggy still and her appetite had not returned.  Her only visitor of the day had been the physiotherapist.  When we arrived, visiting hours on the ward had been shortened.  Though she is expected to remain in hospital for at least a week, no one has given her any ideas on what to expect in terms of recovery. 

To emphasise the point of lack of staffing, my father-in-law had called the hospital and the ward numerous times, but everytime that the call had gone through to the ward, no one answered.  We finally decided to just walk in and find out what was happening.  There was practically no one around.  Not only that, we arrived before visiting hours and fortunately, found her before we had to find a nurse.  We might have been kicked out if we had actually run into a staff member.  She reported she had been woken up several times in the night by another patient calling out for help.  Sure enough, said patient called out several times during our visit.  We had to resist the urge to go and find out what he needed in case anything should have happened and we would have been blamed.  But no one came.  He was practically ignored.

My mother-in-law was bored out of her mind in addition to the grogginess.  We had brought her a book, but she couldn’t read because of the effect of the anaesthesia on her eyes.  They provided her with a small computer screen attached to some phone device.  It was supposed to be for TV/radio, but we found that it did not work without a special card that had to be purchased; needless to say, no one knew how to get one (“That’s nothing to do with us, guv, it’s run by a private company” was the received, general issue excuse.)

All these things might seem trivial, but it points to a lot of apparent problems.  First of all, the staff.  It is a sad state of affairs that we have had to resort to hiring foreigners while our British nurses and doctors are working in private hospitals or with agencies.  It can create issues, especially with communication. I cannot comment on competency.  And, where were the staff when they were needed?  The ward was so quiet, you’d think you were in a mausoleum.  While US hospitals may be noisy, at least you had the feeling you were not alone.  I had had to be treated in a private hospital in England many years ago while I was visiting and it was the same feeling as the US hospitals.

Patient care seems lacking when staff are not hovering around patients.  But, it really doesn’t matter, as long as certain targets are met.  For example, infection control.  Everytime you entered or were near a ward, a motion-activated recording comes on reminding you to wash your hands.  How many people listen to it?  When you hear it everyday, I’m sure you start to ignore it.  I sure did not witness the consultant washing his hands either before or after examining my mother-in-law.  And the faucet outside the room had two separate taps – not very appropriate for recommended effective hand-washing techniques.  Of course, there was the alcohol hand sanitizer, though that is not the standard, even if it is convenient.

Patient comfort is definitely the least of their concerns.  Hospitals like to get patients in and out as quickly as possible.  There are many reasons for this, but I should think that they should only do so if everything is in order.  I would not like to think that my mother-in-law will be kicked out before a definite discharge plan is in place.  But, since they are so bent on quick turnarounds, it may explain why they want patients to be as uncomfortable as possible.  They wouldn’t want them to beg to stay in.  I could not believe the lack of a separate toilet.  In the US, each room, whether private or shared, had its own toilet.  Each bed had its own TV – and it was free unless you wanted something special – like the way they do in hotels.  For goodness’ sake, can the hospital not pay the TV license fee and allow their patients to watch TV?  The charge for TV use is ridiculously exorbitant. Perhaps if the patients were allowed easy access to the TV and/or radio, they might be distracted enough not to bother the nurses, or I should say, the other patients.

These are only my initial impressions of an NHS hospital.  I’m sure there will be more to follow as we progress.  I am starting to understand the frustrations people feel about the care they receive and the poor conditions at several hospitals named in the news.  Perhaps if politicians ever end up in an NHS hospital, they might understand.  But, pigs would fly before politicians are treated by the NHS.

Back to the drawing board, Michael O’Leary

No matter what you think of his ideas, you have to give Michael O’Leary credit for being doggedly determined to discover new ways to save money.  I have never flown Ryanair and I truly wonder how good an airline it really is.  I know it is budget but do passengers feel the “budget”.

O’Leary’s statements about cost-cutting plans have been attention-grabbing, but I know of only one that has come to fruition – the on-line check-in.  Most of the ideas are not new or unique.  For example, the “fat tax”, which has been suggested in other countries as well.  The US is notorious for this and obese people have to buy two seats.  It is a reasonable concession as morbidly obese people cannot safely squeeze into those small economy seats.  At best, they can buy first class tickets to get more room.  Though obese people may complain and try to squeeze themselves into narrow seats, they impinge on passengers beside them.  So, I have no arguments against the “fat tax”.

However, some other ideas are silly, like the toilet and toilet paper charge.  But, the latest sounds somewhat dangerous – standing tickets.  I can just imagine people strapped against some platform like the Gravitron at the amusement parks.  It may be okay during lift-off and in flight, but what about landing?  I think the safety issues need to be addressed.  Of course, Mr. O’Leary got the idea from the Chinese, so he should investigate whether they’ve had any serious liability issues there.  Then again, will the Chinese be honest about that?

Farewell, Michael Jackson

I feel almost speechless.  It is unbelievable to hear that Michael Jackson passed away.  Right on the heels of the most popular Angel, Farrah Fawcett; though she had been out of the limelight for many years until her recent bout of cancer.  Michael has always been in and out of the limelight.  And not always for good publicity.

Like most people, I do follow some celebrity news.  You really can’t help it when it’s everywhere. I suppose I was more interested in my teenage years, but not so much now.  And back then, Michael was BIG.  I won’t say I was a huge fan – I liked some of his songs, but I never “got” the craze.  Because of his death, most people will start concentrating on that part of his life.  Rightly so, since death has a very sobering effect on everyone.

Time may be gentle on his image, but on the other hand, it may refocus attention on his later years when controversy dominated.  Let’s face it, he did lead a very controversial life.  We may criticise people for being so star-struck, but in some ways, Michael Jackson showed that he was star-struck as well.  Though I never knew the man, his actions seemed to reveal someone who was not confident with his own image.  He had multiple plastic surgeries, presumably to look like Diana Ross. He was uncomfortable with his own skin, so he lightened it.  I know he attributed it to vitiligo, but I don’t believe that accounted for all the whitening.  The issues with Neverland, his “children”, and all the youths he associated with will never be fully understood.  There may have been some truth in the accusations levelled at him, but I’m sure there may also have been some maliciousness in hounding him and attempting to extract as much money as possible.  He was essentially bankrupt in the end.

The controversies led him to remove himself from the limelight and for a while, he lived in seclusion.  Then he decided to come back and had planned 50 concerts in London this summer.  It sounded an incredible feat and now, unfortunately, it will never be done.  He cannot prove his critics wrong.

It was said that he suffered from multiple health problems.  Surprisingly, I was never aware of any of this.  Perhaps, I was not obsessed enough with celebrities to have found this out sooner.  That would explain why I still find it unbelievable that he is dead.  I am more inclined to believe that the stress of a comeback brought on the heart attack, if that is what really killed him, rather than any long-term health issues.

He always appeared vibrant and energetic, but that may just be a public front.  He was rather thin, and had always been so, but in his heyday, it was a healthier looking slimness.  That could be because he looked more natural then.  I can’t help but think how differently his life would have been had he not put himself up to public scrutiny by undergoing surgery and adopting such eccentricities.  That may have been the true Michael Jackson, but hindsight shows that it was not a good move to publicise it.  He was so much more popular when he was a normal black man who could out-perform anyone in his time.  Instead, his life went downhill and I’m sure he suffered physically, mentally and emotionally from that roller coaster ride.

Michael was a living legend and it will take some time for Hollywood to get over this one.  Hopefully, there won’t be any silly conspiracy theories, fake deaths and Michael sightings.

John Bercow as Speaker

As I read the reports, and even as I was blogging yesterday, I had this niggling suspicion in the back of my mind that the Margaret Beckett frontrunner story was just a blind for the Labour party voting in John Bercow.  When I saw the results, I nearly dropped dead laughing.

Serves them right, I say!  Had the MPs listened to the people, maybe Ann Widdecombe would be sitting in the Speaker position right now, and there wouldn’t be any talk about Conservatives plotting an overthrow of the Speaker.  After all, she had promised to go at the next election.  But, then again, if she had won, they might have convinced her to stay in politics.  But, no, they’d rather not have done that.  Perhaps, they really don’t want her to stay on their team.  Instead, they get a turncoat and now, they want him out at the next election.

So, what has that really accomplished?  Nothing.  He has a year to prove himself or there will be an attempt to oust him, if not from his party, then from the public.

Who knows?  Maybe his arrogance might actually help him in his role.  If he thinks too highly of himself, he might not allow anyone to influence him.  Especially now that he is where he wants to be.  It’s lonely at the top and he should watch for all the daggers pointed at his back from all sides.

Unprotect the Speaker position

The Speaker election is on today.  Wonder who will win.  Currently, Margaret Beckett is front-runner – unusual, given that her name was hardly mentioned initially.  Of course, now there are rumours that Labour whips are out in force to make this happen.

Of course, I have voiced my own opinions on who I think should be given the job, but MPs are not going to listen.  Most, if not all, do not like the idea of an interim MP.  I guess they’d rather give someone a permanent position regardless of how popular they are in their own constituency.

If they truly want Parliamentary reform, perhaps they should consider starting with the Speaker position.  Why should this single individual remain in power until he/she decides to retire?  It is quite unfair.  There is virtually no chance for the electorate to vote him/her out.  Maybe the issue of who should be Speaker might not be such a matter of gravity if this same Speaker must also put him/herself up for election in his/her constituency at every general election. It would definitely prevent those who may be unpopular with their constituents from attempting to protect their position.  If MPs do not want an interim Speaker, then the Speaker position should not be protected at general elections.  But would MPs ever think about such a monumental reform?

Useless, redundant MPs should be hired as toilet-cleaners

The Public Administration Select Committee has made some recommendations for “wholesale change” in the UK political system.  Though the BBC only reported on some of these recommendations, I’d love to see the entire list of recommendations.

One of these is that the number of ministers need to be reduced.  I agree, especially when some of them seem to be overlapping areas, or a big category broken down into smaller components.  It’s almost like the joke of how many ministers it takes to change a lightbulb.  I wonder if that committee also recommended reducing the total number of MPs as well. The same joke applies.

To reduce the number of ministers and MPs, we could easily save on salaries and expenses.  It would encourage those whose jobs were “saved” to be more cost-effective in their work.  Maybe then we will really get value for money.  Those who lose their jobs will then understand what it is like to be unemployed without any real-world skills. 

But not to worry.  The government can then put them in those public work schemes (which many abhor).  I’d recommend one where they go and clean all the public toilets.  Has anyone visited a good one recently?  I thought not.  Good, clean public toilets are practically nonexistent.  There must be a better way to provide better maintenance for them.  Maybe, it requires more frequent visits.  Councils would complain they can’t afford to hire more people.  But, with the money saved from getting rid of useless, redundant MPs, we can plow it into re-hiring these same MPs to do the job.

The only clean public toilets are probably the ones not available to the public.  I mean, why aren’t there public toilets in libraries?  I can only assume there are, but they’re only available to the staff, not the public.  But, since libraries are built by councils using tax-payer money, shouldn’t their toilets be made available to the public?

Some might argue that MPs without skills might be underqualified for such a job as toilet cleaning.  But, I’m sure we can provide some training.  If they can’t use their heads, they can try using their hands.  If they can’t even do that, well, I suppose it proves they’re good-for-nothings.  Others might argue that they will take jobs away from other more qualified people. It would be interesting to see how many people fight for the job of toilet cleaning when more positions are made available.

Ann Widdecombe for Speaker please

Who should be Speaker?

Though it is up to the MPs, the public definitely have their favourite picked out- Ms. Ann Widdecombe.  However, she is not the universal favourite.

One of the reasons some might not like her as a Speaker is that she intends to only do the job until the next election.  Though that may be a reasonable argument against her taking the job, it is a rather silly reason.  In fact, she would be the perfect candidate for that very reason.  After all, why should the new MPs who are likely to be voted in not have a say on who the speaker should be?

The fact that she is standing down at the next election due to retirement means that her job would not be “protected” as any of the other candidates for the Speakership would be.  If the MP elected to be Speaker is not popular enough to be re-elected in his/her own constituency, why should his/her job be protected simply because he/she is the Speaker?

Another complaint I have heard about Ms. Widdecombe is that she voted against Mr. Martin’s reform policies.  So what?  Are they implying that Mr. Martin’s reforms were “excellent”?  I highly doubt it since he was against transparency.

Overall, the impression one gets from Ms. Widdecombe is a no-nonsense, intelligent approach to issues of the day.  If the MPs cannot see this and can only vote in favour of someone who might benefit them, then they lack intelligence themselves.

Consumer complaints amounting to advertising censorship

I’ve read many articles recently related to consumer complaints about advertising content.  The Advertising Standards Authority must have their hands full with some silly complaints.

Now, everyone has the freedom of speech to express their dissatisfaction with commercial advertisements, and some advertisements may be extremely offensive or seriously in breach of “truth in advertising”, but others are just downright nonsense.  It makes you wonder if these people have no sense of humour or so goaded by envy that they feel they must need complain.  What do they do with their days besides sitting in front of the TV?

I refer to the latest complaints regarding the Duffy Coke ads.  I have not seen the commercial, but the nature of the complaint was ridiculous. Watch my eyes as they execute a perfect-10 arch from left to right.  Maybe it’s my American mentality, but when we see things that we know cannot and does not happen in real life, we just shrug it off and laugh.  We might say, “That’s a stupid commercial”, but we do not call up the advertising watchdog and register a complaint.  Not unless there is something extremely offensive or inappropriate.

With all these complaints, it seems like we are approaching a state of censorship.  Yet, the censorship does not appear to address the more serious issues that we face every day, but silly nonsense that any logical mind can dismiss.  The good thing is that the ASA is able to discern silliness and dismiss nonsensical complaints.  However, it is still time-consuming and unnecessary

North Korea belligerently continues nuclear weaponry; Iran’s election fraud

North Korea has continued to show its belligerence by declaring that it plans to weaponise its plutonium reserves.  Nothing is working to curb their appetite for hostility.  Yet, they declare that their enemies are showing antagonism. 

Meanwhile, Kim Jong-Il is not expected to last long as he is supposedly getting weaker from a previous stroke.  The question of his successor is still unresolved, though there were reports his youngest son was going to take over.

In another part of the world, almost half-way across the globe, we have the elections in Iran, whose results are controversial.  Both sides claim victory; however, the electoral commission has declared Ahmadinejad as the winner.  Of course they would, they work for the government, don’t they?  Mr. Mousavi is contesting the results on the grounds of voting irregularities.  As if that is new or unexpected.  Mr. Ahmadinejad may have the support of the lower classes, and Mr. Mousavi the middle class, but there were two other candidates who may have split some of the votes.  I would not put it past Mr. Ahmadinejad and his supporters to have rigged it such that their own votes would be counted.  It is a very corrupt country.

Iran’s voting is similar to the AV model and if Mr. Ahmadinejad is declared the winner, I think this is good enough reason to not even consider it for the UK.  Though, if the commission’s report is true and accurate, Mr. Ahmadinejad would win under whichever model, the fact that other parties may pull votes away, thereby preventing the overthrow of such a corrupt government, points out the truth that FPTP really can help kick out the incumbent.  Of course, I agree with Mr. Mousavi that there were most likely voting irregularities, but unfortunately, in such a country, I would not expect the government to take it seriously or for the repressed peoples to protest too loudly.

Britons clueless about basic anatomy

So, this is the state to which our education system has deteriorated.  We’ve seen the poor GCSE math and geography questions, now we find out that most people don’t know where their organs are.  According to a UK survey, 50% of people did not know where their heart was. 

Of course, the survey pointed out that in 1970, results of a similar survey showed similar results.  So, what does that mean?  The public is still clueless about basic anatomy.

Interestingly, almost everyone knew where their intestines were.  Then, again, that might not be so surprising given the obsession with eating.

Though the survey did not ask it, I would certainly hope that everyone knows where their brain is.  It’s hard to tell whether someone really has one sometimes.  Harder still to tell whether they know how to use it.