Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
MisterC

Rangers fans for yes

Recommended Posts

SHAMELESS Alex Neil and Nicola Sturgeon were urged to explain themselves or resign last night over a secretive attempt to privatise the Scottish NHS by the back door.

The angry response comes as this newspaper today exposes a long-running campaign to manipulate health board spending figures to hide the full extent of private sector involvement.

Ministers boast that only £80million of hospital funding is privatised but in fact almost £500million went to “sub-contractors” last year – almost five per cent of Holyrood’s annual NHS budget.

These third parties include commercial firms, voluntary organisations and councils, in order to fund care for the elderly, people with mental health issues and learning disabilities, and community care.

Councils are increasingly bringing in the private sector to help meet needs in each of these areas – a fact that is acknowledged and even encouraged by the Scottish Government.

The effect is that millions of pounds of Scottish health funding ends up in the hands of independent firms each year, but does not appear in the NHS books.

In a further hugely damaging revelation, the annual sum given to sub-contractors – including these massive hidden payments to the private sector – has more than doubled since the SNP came to power. The official NHS figures are buried at the end of the annual Scottish Health Service Costs publication, contained within the 89th of 90 spending reports.

Last night, Scottish Conservative health spokesman Jackson Carlaw said: “Both Alex Neil and Nicola Sturgeon have manipulated and concealed the spend on private health care in Scotland while lambasting Westminster for roughly the same spend in England and then shamelessly using their manipulated figures in the referendum campaign.

“Their personal integrity has been compromised. Had parliament not been in recess they would both now have to explain themselves and explain why they should not resign for wilfully misleading MSPs and the wider public.”

He added: “This is a massively embarrassing revelation for the SNP, and undermines even further its cowardly scaremongering on the NHS we’ve seen in recent weeks.

“The hypocrisy of Alex Salmond pointing the finger south when his own Scottish Government has been relying so heavily on private care is astonishing. “This discovery should put the nonsensical Yes campaign argument to bed once and for all.

“We believe the independent sector plays a vital role in supporting the NHS, and it seems from these figures the SNP is in agreement.”

Scottish Labour’s health spokesman Neil Findlay said: “The increased role of the private sector in social care provision in Scotland is a direct result of the cuts to council budgets by this SNP government.

“Councils have had an underfunded council tax freeze imposed upon them and along with sharply reducing budgets they are expected to provide the same level of service – they have been put in an impossible situation by the SNP government. We have been warning about this social case crisis for the last few years. Alex Neil needs to take urgent action to ensure that social care services are sufficiently supported, otherwise it is the most vulnerable in our society who will suffer the consequences.”

According to the Scottish Government, £5million was spent on private healthcare by NHS boards in 2012/13 – around 0.8 per cent of the budget. This is much lower than the corresponding figure south of the Border and has led to claims that a No vote threatens the NHS.

However, the country's 14 health boards spent £490,622,166 on sub-contractors – 4.8 per cent of the annual budget, and more than the corresponding figure in the north east of England.

Of that total, £63.8million was spent with voluntary organisations and an enormous £343.8million went to councils. The total has more than doubled since the SNP first came to power in 2007, when the annual sub-contract bill stood at £225million.

According to the Scottish Government’s own report from February, “almost all councils in Scotland are now highly dependent on care homes that are provided by private sector organisations.” The Mental Health Strategy for Scotland: 2011-2015 calls for “the NHS, local authorities, the third and private sectors” to work together.

In a report entitled Improving Quality of Life for People with Learning Disabilities, published in June 2013, the Scottish Government recommends “local authorities and their NHS partners should work with private, voluntary and third sector agencies”. And an Audit Scotland report on community care, published in April 2012, said: “NHS boards and councils need to work together... with private sector organisations.”

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/505304/EXCLUSIVE-The-secret-sell-out-of-Scotland-s-NHS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And you can guarantee that ?, nobody in the public eye knows what would happen after a yes vote, but what I do know is, if it goes tits up, there's no going back. Yes voters THINK ON. :7325:

So you'll base your decision on fear rather than what could be - oh how weak and sad - mind you seems to be the basis of the no campaign FUD fear uncertainty and doubt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So no vote means that we are all happy with the way this country is being run with all the cuts and unemployment i am still undecided on this .

A NO vote means additional powers for Scotland and a more secure and better future for the Scottish people.

I want my children and grandchildren to have a better life than me or at worst the same....so vote NO.

A yes vote will mean additional cuts of 6 billion pounds / higher taxes, cuts to NHS, cuts to public services, billions

more in borrowing, higher unemployment.

Currency unknown but he has just came up with 3 plan B's in the last month (never mentioned this before) maybe this clown will

make up another 3 plan B's in the next 2 weeks !! The separatists miscalculated oil revenue by 4 billion pounds and start

up costs.

Salmond just admitted currency is not an asset but still threatens to walk away from our debts and he wont increase benefits

(he said he would previously)

The SNP have done fuck all in 7 years to help those in poverty, they could have raised taxes, raised the council tax,

raised taxes for millionaires. They opposed the minimum wage.

We have now one police force answerable to an SNP justice minister. They have authorised the police to carry guns, they have

proposed removing corroboration, they want to introduce "mentors" for every child in Scotland to “help” us watch our children.

So to answer your question mate, I am not not happy with the way Scotland is run.....I want fuckin rid of Salmond /SNP NOW

chepooka likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

So no vote means that we are all happy with the way this country is being run with all the cuts and unemployment i am still undecided on this .

No it doesnt. It means you think a yes vote with all the lies and risks that go with it might not be the best solution.Yes are asking us to take a major risk with no guarantees with a bunch of lies also, they have convinced me theyre not the way forward. If you arent convinced then a No is the logical vote, therell be another referendum in the coming years but no going back after separation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm voting Yes and after that I will go back to voting labour whether it is to a Scottish or Westminster Government.

Make no mistake, a yes vote will be a vote for SNP for years to come.

Labour will be defeated and broken.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A NO vote means additional powers for Scotland and a more secure and better future for the Scottish people.

I want my children and grandchildren to have a better life than me or at worst the same....so vote NO.

A yes vote will mean additional cuts of 6 billion pounds / higher taxes, cuts to NHS, cuts to public services, billions

more in borrowing, higher unemployment.

Currency unknown but he has just came up with 3 plan B's in the last month (never mentioned this before) maybe this clown will

make up another 3 plan B's in the next 2 weeks !! The separatists miscalculated oil revenue by 4 billion pounds and start

up costs.

Salmond just admitted currency is not an asset but still threatens to walk away from our debts and he wont increase benefits

(he said he would previously)

The SNP have done fuck all in 7 years to help those in poverty, they could have raised taxes, raised the council tax,

raised taxes for millionaires. They opposed the minimum wage.

We have now one police force answerable to an SNP justice minister. They have authorised the police to carry guns, they have

proposed removing corroboration, they want to introduce "mentors" for every child in Scotland to “help” us watch our children.

So to answer your question mate, I am not not happy with the way Scotland is run.....I want fuckin rid of Salmond /SNP NOW

How could the SNP increase taxation on Millionaires? That is the whole point of this referendum - giving Scotland the right to set full taxes and remove that right from Westminster (who make a complete cunt of everything they touch).

Act of Scotland comes into effect in 2016 - if that is what you are thinking but that just gives them the chance to increase tax by up to 10% - certainly not 7 years ago!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

if any of them try to give me there liein shite ill ram it down there fuckin neck the traitors that they are they better stay away from ibrox and never come near us again fuckin scum thats what they are i hate the bastards they are trying to kill oor club faster that the uof are

hahaharhahahaharhahahahaharhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Read what this poster says, read it carefully......

And conclude that glue sniffing is bad, really bad - what a roaster

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, but you cant be very bright if you believe ANY of that pich for a second.

A mere attempt to attract Protestant suckers to vote yes.

Their big cause celebre AFTER any yes vote (God help us) would be full republican status.

hahahahahahahaaaaaaah!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No it doesnt. It means you think a yes vote with all the lies and risks that go with it might not be the best solution.Yes are asking us to take a major risk with no guarantees with a bunch of lies also, they have convinced me theyre not the way forward. If you arent convinced then a No is the logical vote, therell be another referendum in the coming years but no going back after separation.

I agree, if you are completely convinced independence is the way to go by all means vote yes, if you are unsure in any way it has to be no. Can't go back to London greeting with tail between the legs if it all goes wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So you'll base your decision on fear rather than what could be - oh how weak and sad - mind you seems to be the basis of the no campaign FUD fear uncertainty and doubt

FUd nope not the NO camp IIRC the phrase was originally coined by the genius who was Gene Amdahl just after he parted ways with IBM. :D

The fear vote is no worse than the "ach I'll try yes"vote. Both camps need to make a rational non emotional choice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How could the SNP increase taxation on Millionaires? That is the whole point of this referendum - giving Scotland the right to set full taxes and remove that right from Westminster (who make a complete cunt of everything they touch).

Act of Scotland comes into effect in 2016 - if that is what you are thinking but that just gives them the chance to increase tax by up to 10% - certainly not 7 years ago!

You are right. My mistake about taxation and proposed taxation.

The SNP have stated that they will not introduce the 50p rate in an independent Scotland.

They have frozen the Council tax for years and threatened local authorities that they would cut their budgets if they did not

accept their Budget proposals.

So much for their concern about public services, poverty etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FUd nope not the NO camp IIRC the phrase was originally coined by the genius who was Gene Amdahl just after he parted ways with IBM. :D

The fear vote is no worse than the "ach I'll try yes"vote. Both camps need to make a rational non emotional choice.

I believe the FUD factor was a sales strategy developed by IBM and taught to its senior sakes execs. ( along with the corporate phrase ' no one ever got sacked for buying an IBM')

And actually I agree this is an emotional decision and not one to be made that can be based on 'facts' ( the. 'Facts' are unknowns) and I say my view if an Independant Scotland is a risk worth taking

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So you'll base your decision on fear rather than what could be - oh how weak and sad - mind you seems to be the basis of the no campaign FUD fear uncertainty and doubt

No I'll base my decision on what's best for my family, Ya Fud.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So you'll base your decision on fear rather than what could be - oh how weak and sad - mind you seems to be the basis of the no campaign FUD fear uncertainty and doubt

what a stinking attitude , if uncertainty is a key factor in anyones vote then so be it but call anyone weak or sad because of it is just bolloks.

when you cross a road do you wait untill the road is clear and you know you can safely cross the road or do you wait till a hgv truck is fast approaching but fuck it you decide to risk it anyway because if your fast enough you might just make it anyway?

Its a smiple aspect of human nature to have fear and uncertainty of the unkonwn and that is what independence is. this " och fuck it , take a risk" mentality amongst yes voters is alarming if anything else.

coop troop likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

what a stinking attitude , if uncertainty is a key factor in anyones vote then so be it but call anyone weak or sad because of it is just bolloks.

when you cross a road do you wait untill the road is clear and you know you can safely cross the road or do you wait till a hgv truck is fast approaching but fuck it you decide to risk it anyway because if your fast enough you might just make it anyway?

Its a smiple aspect of human nature to have fear and uncertainty of the unkonwn and that is what independence is. this " och fuck it , take a risk" mentality amongst yes voters is alarming if anything else.

While crossing a busy road I take the Chinese view point if 'if it's not my day....'

But back to fear - if you fear everything you never try anything risky or new and without risk there is very seldom reward - so yes to me it's weak to base your vote ( either way ) on fear. To me Even if you vote no - do it because you see the positives in the union and not because you fear change - change, as they say, is constant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

voted yes. just think it's the right thing to do. if that makes me less of a rangers supporter in anyone's eyes i really don't care.

just really don't think politics/religion should matter when it comes to football. i dont need to vote no or be protestant to be support the club.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While crossing a busy road I take the Chinese view point if 'if it's not my day....'

But back to fear - if you fear everything you never try anything risky or new and without risk there is very seldom reward - so yes to me it's weak to base your vote ( either way ) on fear. To me Even if you vote no - do it because you see the positives in the union and not because you fear change - change, as they say, is constant.

I like to pick and choose where i will take my risks , however some decisions are far too important and you need to actually think if a risk is worth it i.e buying a house , a car or the future of a country and the lives of those who live in it. if you like to live life and take risks do you just go into a car showroom and go to them " give us a car , any car , i will take my chances" or do you have a look around and use a number of factors to decide which car will benfit you the most.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not like deciding whether to buy a bottle of wine or stick to beers because you might get a bad hangover on the wine. It's a big decision and big risk that can't be reversed if it turns out to be the wrong decision.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

voted yes. just think it's the right thing to do. if that makes me less of a rangers supporter in anyone's eyes i really don't care.

just really don't think politics/religion should matter when it comes to football. i dont need to vote no or be protestant to be support the club.

liar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

voted yes. just think it's the right thing to do. if that makes me less of a rangers supporter in anyone's eyes i really don't care.

just really don't think politics/religion should matter when it comes to football. i dont need to vote no or be protestant to be support the club.

So you don't believe that we are more than a football club?

Copland bear likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...