Comments on: Social care leaders’ verdicts on the adult care green paper July 2009 http://www.247professionalhealth.com/2009/08/social-care-leaders-verdicts-on-the-adult-care-green-paper-july-2009/ 247 Professional Health is a staff and employment agency to the health care sector Tue, 02 Nov 2010 13:41:19 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: Peter Bray http://www.247professionalhealth.com/2009/08/social-care-leaders-verdicts-on-the-adult-care-green-paper-july-2009/comment-page-1/#comment-72 Peter Bray Fri, 14 Aug 2009 13:49:17 +0000 http://247professionalhealth.com/?p=1307#comment-72 This Green Paper exposes yet another divide in government statements. First we are told that we are a wealthy nation - then comes this paper stating that we cannot afford to continue providing the financial care support for some of the weakest members in our society. This nonsense has to stop. The present government has introduced a range of new taxes (and receipts therefrom) yet managed to heavily overspend because principally it chose to spend on disputed matters (Iraq, ID cards, unnecessary consultants, useless computer systems, abysmal failures in contract decisions, etc), whilst utterly failing to be prudent and to stop boom and bust. Even the enormous impact of the banking crisis should never have reached such proportions here; the lack of understanding involved in setting up the tripartite agreement took no account of the inability of the FSA to handle its existing role satisfactorily let alone the experience and knowledge it lacked. The 'excuse' from government that this economic recession is a global problem deliberately ignores their obvious lack of preparedness and recognition of what was so clearly happening all around us despite their heavily emphasised promises. There is a lack of control when it comes to getting value for money. Government concentrates on what it likes or prefers to spend money on whilst ignoring areas where there is an obvious need. Charity begins at home maybe an old cliched saying yet it has some merit in our case. We are willing to spend vast sums abroad whilst introducing spending cuts at home. This obvious dichotomy is just so confusing to the electorate and is one reason why so many do not vote. They feel disenfranchised, and that is the case in reality. It matters little now which party has control as government carries on like some huge steamroller that cannot provide the essential results so many of us desire, whilst wasting so much of its spend. Ideas now put forward do not take account of all the possible factors; the future demands will also depend upon the general health of the nation, which is improving and receiving frenzied government directions on obesity, stroke, heart attack et al, plus new medical advances yet to be discovered as well as those in the pipeline, possible new sources of wealth creation - and not simply on the ratio of employed to the needy. Even the assumption that there will be fewer people employed is open to rigorous examination particularly when considering the impact of increases in the retirement ages. If these proposals form the basis of a new Act then the result will be huge new problems, far greater than at present and needing even greater funding. Simply taking the inability of social services to fulfil its present remit; it is under resourced; many staff are demoralised; overly bureaucratic and poorly managed; the ever present fear of yet another horror surfacing; the inability to attract staff let alone staff of the right calibre; are well known and to imagine that this service could take over the administration of more very important work beggars belief. The knock on effect on council taxation will be another serious concern yet this does not appear to have received even cursory consideration. This Green Paper exposes yet another divide in government statements. First we are told that we are a wealthy nation – then comes this paper stating that we cannot afford to continue providing the financial care support for some of the weakest members in our society. This nonsense has to stop.
The present government has introduced a range of new taxes (and receipts therefrom) yet managed to heavily overspend because principally it chose to spend on disputed matters (Iraq, ID cards, unnecessary consultants, useless computer systems, abysmal failures in contract decisions, etc), whilst utterly failing to be prudent and to stop boom and bust.
Even the enormous impact of the banking crisis should never have reached such proportions here; the lack of understanding involved in setting up the tripartite agreement took no account of the inability of the FSA to handle its existing role satisfactorily let alone the experience and knowledge it lacked. The ‘excuse’ from government that this economic recession is a global problem deliberately ignores their obvious lack of preparedness and recognition of what was so clearly happening all around us despite their heavily emphasised promises.

There is a lack of control when it comes to getting value for money.
Government concentrates on what it likes or prefers to spend money on whilst ignoring areas where there is an obvious need. Charity begins at home maybe an old cliched saying yet it has some merit in our case. We are willing to spend vast sums abroad whilst introducing spending cuts at home. This obvious dichotomy is just so confusing to the electorate and is one reason why so many do not vote. They feel disenfranchised, and that is the case in reality. It matters little now which party has control as government carries on like some huge steamroller that cannot provide the essential results so many of us desire, whilst wasting so much of its spend.

Ideas now put forward do not take account of all the possible factors; the future demands will also depend upon the general health of the nation, which is improving and receiving frenzied government directions on obesity, stroke, heart attack et al, plus new medical advances yet to be discovered as well as those in the pipeline, possible new sources of wealth creation – and not simply on the ratio of employed to the needy. Even the assumption that there will be fewer people employed is open to rigorous examination particularly when considering the impact of increases in the retirement ages.

If these proposals form the basis of a new Act then the result will be huge new problems, far greater than at present and needing even greater funding. Simply taking the inability of social services to fulfil its present remit; it is under resourced; many staff are demoralised; overly bureaucratic and poorly managed; the ever present fear of yet another horror surfacing; the inability to attract staff let alone staff of the right calibre; are well known and to imagine that this service could take over the administration of more very important work beggars belief. The knock on effect on council taxation will be another serious concern yet this does not appear to have received even cursory consideration.

]]>