My Mum is disgusted.
"We should be above this." She keeps muttering darkly.
Woolas, Chaytor, Byers in "cash for access" - It's just not meant to be like that.
Yes, Mr Dale, Mr Fawkes, I could go on, but my point would be the same.
In any Labour tribalists mind, sleaze is for Tories.
We only set up the Labour party in the first place, because of the disgusting exploitation of most of the working population, the "old boys network" the endless Tory backhanders and blatant abuse of power.
The early nineties were smug times for us lefties. Neil Hamilton and his cash for questions, Jonathon Aitken and Jeffrey Archer even went to prison for their arrogance and abuse of power.
The noughties, not so much.
We've discussed this one endlessly.
Conclusion : Frankly, all the while Labour selects it's candidates from the same narrow public school, Oxbridge elite and ignores the very people it purports to represent, why on earth should we be surprised that their candidates behave like..... well, Tories?
This is one area where Ed M has made very promising noises. An academy for hopeful MPs, no more parachuted-in candidates, a more representtive Labour Party, a genuine effort to achieve a more equal gender balance - I hope more than almost anything that all of this comes to pass, otherwise, why on earth wouldn't they all behave like crooks?
If the Labour Party is defined by anything, in my mind, it is defined by Keir Hardy, taking his place on the opposition benches when there was no opposition, just Liberals and Tories. In his tweed suit and flat cap, can you even begin to imagine the sneers, the insults, the condescension he faced? Just because an MP is working class and passionate, does that mean we turn our backs on the "Third Way"? How very arrogant to think that we would.
Don't get me wrong, I have no problem at all with the Harriet Harmans and the Tony Blairs. To leave public school a socialist takes strength of character and independent thought. We just need a lot more Alan Johnsons and John Prescotts to claim the mantle of party of progress and integrity. When Ed M said he would go out into the country to see what ordinary folks thought, I sighed a jaded sigh. A Labour leader should be moulded by the opinions of ordinary folks, he should at least aspire to higher ideals. Tories cheat the working family, they lie, it's what they do : http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/jan/07/politicians-lie-david-cameron-mendacity-expenses
Can Labour try really, really hard not to please?
Sunday, 9 January 2011
Old and Sad
Last night was fun. Populus and ICM released eagerly awaited polls from Oldham and Saddleworth, the seat of disgraced Labour MP Phil Woolas. A little later, the new kid on the block, Survation chipped in.
For a while, I had been mystified at the coalition strategy of supporting the Libs while the Tories stood back. If it's indeed true that the Lib Dems have lost something like two thirds of their support since the General Election, whilst the Tories have gained 2% or so and Labour have gained a healthy 12%, then surely it would make much more sense for the Tories to give it a shot? Whatever incumbency factor Woolas cost Labour, surely it would be more than cancelled out by the national image the Libs now find they hold?
Then the penny dropped. Cameron knew, as Lord Ashcroft put it that,
"The idea of the Conservatives springing to victory from third place in a Greater Manchester constituency at a time of tough spending cuts from a Tory-led government always seemed unlikely."
Enter the fall guy. As ever, Clegg was willing to take a hit for his puppet-master. Poor man, it's actually embarrassing now. Is he so a-political that he couldn't see this by-election would merely make him feel a little Old-er and a little Sad-der? Did his boyish pre-election optimism really allow him to believe he could win this seat? When Cameron offered to step back, did he honestly believe he was doing him a favour. Couldn't he see, that if anyone had to lose, it might as well be the Champion of all Losers?
Well, the scores on the doors look bleak - not just for the Clegg Massif, but for the coalition as a whole. If you've read Ashcroft's analysis in the Torygraph, you might be forgiven for thinking that Labour should be doing a little better. But let's remember, this is a three way marginal, where Labour only won by 103 votes, arguably because the Labour candidate played very dirty indeed. The press has been devastating (rightly so in my opinion) and in normal circumstances, the Lib Dem, Elwyn Watkins, should have walked it.
Strategically, the worst thing Clegg could have done was insist the result would be close, that his party could win it.
Here are the Populus and ICM results: ICM have CON 18%(-8), LAB 44%(+12), LDEM 27%(-5) Populus have CON 15%(-11), LAB 46%(+14), LDEM 29(-3)
Anthony Wells analysis at UK Polling Report points out, http://www.ukpollingreport.co.uk/
"The story of the by-election is basically there – almost a third of people who voted Lib Dem in May 2010 have defected directly to Labour, and those defecting Lib Dems are the most hostile to the coalition in the other questions asked (more so than existing Labour voters!). However, this slump in Liberal Democrat support is partially offset by widespread tactical voting by Conservative supporters, with around a third of people who voted Tory in May 2010 now saying they’ll vote Liberal Democrat."
Just as with the national opinion polls, Labour are up 12%. Cons are down much more than they are nationally, but that appears to be Con voters voting tactically for their Lib coalition partners. Add the Con and Lib drop together and you have the same 13% the Libs have lost elsewhere with Cons up 2%.
Crucially, and the main point of me writing about the same subject I'm sure most of t'internet is writing about this morning is the combined Con and Lib scores.
Since the coalition was formed, every Labour rise in the polls saw Tory poll geeks everywhere chorus "Aha, but Add Together Tory And Dem scores (ATTAD) and Labour are stuffed. Well looky-here! Even adding the above scores together, sees only a tiny chance of a win with ICM and a 2% Labour lead with Populus. Helpfully though, Lord Ashcroft (who commissioned the Populus poll) asked the question . how people would have voted had there been a joint Con-LD candidate. The result appears to be Lab 47%, Con/LD38%. Terrible news for any right wingers hoping to consign Labour to the bins of history by forming a yellow/blue consensus.
If you are a poll geek like me, you'll have noticed that the apparent "likelihood to vote" figures amongst Labour voters and disillusioned Lib Dems are extraordinarily high. I'd have to conclude that the public are lining up, positively itching to give the coalition it's first kicking, and it's not going to be pretty.
Seems the future's bright after all - and it's not Orange.
**Any of you harrumphing that I've ignored the rather closer Survation poll, showing my obvious bias, there are, I'm afraid impeccable reasons: They're not a member of the polling council, and in the words of Anthony Wells again,
"ICM and Populus are more likely to give us an accurate impression. Survation seem to have suffered from an exceptionally high refusal rate of 47% (perhaps it was their questionnaire, or introduction to it – ICM typically get about a fifth of that) meaning the final voting intention figures were based on just 225 people, giving a very high margin of error. They haven’t provided their weighting targets, but the weighting regime itself was very simple – age, gender, past vote. Compare that to the more complex regimes used by established phone pollsters, which include social class, tenure, work status and so on. I’d stick with the experienced hands on this one"
For a while, I had been mystified at the coalition strategy of supporting the Libs while the Tories stood back. If it's indeed true that the Lib Dems have lost something like two thirds of their support since the General Election, whilst the Tories have gained 2% or so and Labour have gained a healthy 12%, then surely it would make much more sense for the Tories to give it a shot? Whatever incumbency factor Woolas cost Labour, surely it would be more than cancelled out by the national image the Libs now find they hold?
Then the penny dropped. Cameron knew, as Lord Ashcroft put it that,
"The idea of the Conservatives springing to victory from third place in a Greater Manchester constituency at a time of tough spending cuts from a Tory-led government always seemed unlikely."
Enter the fall guy. As ever, Clegg was willing to take a hit for his puppet-master. Poor man, it's actually embarrassing now. Is he so a-political that he couldn't see this by-election would merely make him feel a little Old-er and a little Sad-der? Did his boyish pre-election optimism really allow him to believe he could win this seat? When Cameron offered to step back, did he honestly believe he was doing him a favour. Couldn't he see, that if anyone had to lose, it might as well be the Champion of all Losers?
Well, the scores on the doors look bleak - not just for the Clegg Massif, but for the coalition as a whole. If you've read Ashcroft's analysis in the Torygraph, you might be forgiven for thinking that Labour should be doing a little better. But let's remember, this is a three way marginal, where Labour only won by 103 votes, arguably because the Labour candidate played very dirty indeed. The press has been devastating (rightly so in my opinion) and in normal circumstances, the Lib Dem, Elwyn Watkins, should have walked it.
Strategically, the worst thing Clegg could have done was insist the result would be close, that his party could win it.
Here are the Populus and ICM results: ICM have CON 18%(-8), LAB 44%(+12), LDEM 27%(-5) Populus have CON 15%(-11), LAB 46%(+14), LDEM 29(-3)
Anthony Wells analysis at UK Polling Report points out, http://www.ukpollingreport.co.uk/
"The story of the by-election is basically there – almost a third of people who voted Lib Dem in May 2010 have defected directly to Labour, and those defecting Lib Dems are the most hostile to the coalition in the other questions asked (more so than existing Labour voters!). However, this slump in Liberal Democrat support is partially offset by widespread tactical voting by Conservative supporters, with around a third of people who voted Tory in May 2010 now saying they’ll vote Liberal Democrat."
Just as with the national opinion polls, Labour are up 12%. Cons are down much more than they are nationally, but that appears to be Con voters voting tactically for their Lib coalition partners. Add the Con and Lib drop together and you have the same 13% the Libs have lost elsewhere with Cons up 2%.
Crucially, and the main point of me writing about the same subject I'm sure most of t'internet is writing about this morning is the combined Con and Lib scores.
Since the coalition was formed, every Labour rise in the polls saw Tory poll geeks everywhere chorus "Aha, but Add Together Tory And Dem scores (ATTAD) and Labour are stuffed. Well looky-here! Even adding the above scores together, sees only a tiny chance of a win with ICM and a 2% Labour lead with Populus. Helpfully though, Lord Ashcroft (who commissioned the Populus poll) asked the question . how people would have voted had there been a joint Con-LD candidate. The result appears to be Lab 47%, Con/LD38%. Terrible news for any right wingers hoping to consign Labour to the bins of history by forming a yellow/blue consensus.
If you are a poll geek like me, you'll have noticed that the apparent "likelihood to vote" figures amongst Labour voters and disillusioned Lib Dems are extraordinarily high. I'd have to conclude that the public are lining up, positively itching to give the coalition it's first kicking, and it's not going to be pretty.
Seems the future's bright after all - and it's not Orange.
**Any of you harrumphing that I've ignored the rather closer Survation poll, showing my obvious bias, there are, I'm afraid impeccable reasons: They're not a member of the polling council, and in the words of Anthony Wells again,
"ICM and Populus are more likely to give us an accurate impression. Survation seem to have suffered from an exceptionally high refusal rate of 47% (perhaps it was their questionnaire, or introduction to it – ICM typically get about a fifth of that) meaning the final voting intention figures were based on just 225 people, giving a very high margin of error. They haven’t provided their weighting targets, but the weighting regime itself was very simple – age, gender, past vote. Compare that to the more complex regimes used by established phone pollsters, which include social class, tenure, work status and so on. I’d stick with the experienced hands on this one"
Friday, 7 January 2011
For What it's Worth...
I see Ed M got a bit of a drubbing on Radio 2
"Unmarried, disloyal and cold" were the accusations from various callers, though quite what "unmarried" has to do with anything, I don't know.
More worrying was the comment on the article I read that suggested Ed isn't attacking the coalition too hard because he believes that, on the whole they're right. Terrifying thought.
If I were on an hour long phone in for Radio Two, I would find it hard not to descend into spluttering. Where would I start? Would I focus on the astonishingly naive assumption that cutting police officers at a time when crime is bound to rise (it always does when unemployment is rising) and at the same time closing courts, cutting prison places and slashing legal aid won't lead to chaos?
Would I spend the hour trying to convey just what a mash up the Tories are making of the NHS? Would I talk about the funding changes and "efficiency savings" that are cuts by another name? The cancer patients already waiting longer for diagnosis and those needing hip replacements told to now wait in terrible pain as they are no longer a "priority"
Perhaps I would list the endless cuts faced by those who are sick or disabled, focussing on the really churlish, callous and illogical cuts that won't save money, but will cause misery and hardship.
The problem I would have in an hour long interview would be not descending into a kind of ranting, shouting, jumbled up mess as I tried to stay coherent through my fury.
But, the title of this post is "For what it's Worth" and the aim was to share my opinion with Ed about what would set the airwaves alight. It needs cahunas the size of Wales and a raging fire in the belly, but it is honest and brave and most importantly, it sounds a bit Labour. If that isn't too much to ask.
2 Things. First challenge this nonsense on the economy. Over and over and over and over until you sound like a stuck record. We are getting close to a time when Osborne's policies will be those driving the economic data - until now there's been a convenient smattering or the Darling/Brown magic to cushion his glaring incompetence. And yes, I do mean "magic", if this word makes you snigger, then it shows just how unchallenged the Tories are over the economy.
Through the worst recession in living memory, Darling and Brown kept unemployment down, (less than they inherited from the Tories in 97) repossessions were minimised with support for homeowners, inflation stayed reasonable, interest rates were at rock bottom and businesses stayed afloat. Crucially, the deficit went down by 25 billion from measures to support growth and we were predicted to emerge faster and stronger from recession than anywhere else in Europe.
Since Georgie took the helm all of these indicators are at risk and there's no evidence whatsoever that his plan will work. On the contrary, if we look to the 1930's or the post war period, there's every chance it will not. The shadow cabinet should be fearless, mocking and above all confident, that their plan was the right plan and Georgie's is wrong. "Oooh, but Daily Fail readers might laugh." Yes, well, don't worry, we laugh at them every day. The biggest damage done to Labour since the coalition of blue and orange Tories was formed is the fantasy suggestion that we're in this mess because Labour spent all the money. It sounds more ridiculous by the day when the entire world is suffering the same economic woes.
The second attack should be over Labour's record. It won't be fat cat bankers or wealthy businessmen or out of touch politicians who suffer through a Tory 5 years, we know it won't. It will be the poor, the vulnerable, the unemployed and the dispossessed. The very people Labour can claim to have helped the most. However much Murdoch might like to put his own dubious spin on these matters, crime fell by over 40%, unemployment stayed low, youth unemployment was eradicated almost entirely up until the credit crunch, and many decaying and dangerous estates and wastelands were regenerated.
For those about to be clobbered, there is the minimum wage, tax credits, sure start centres, free nursery places for 3 and 4 year olds, employment protection laws, equality rights, civil partnerships, winter fuel payments, free bus passes and TV licenses. Waiting lists went down in our hospitals and on almost every indicator, education improved.
And guess what? The economy thrived. Growth was steady, inflation was low and unemployment fell. Labour proved definitively that they could look after the vulnerable at the same time as supporting growth. To allow that entire record to be buried under the dubious failures of Iraq and civil liberty is ludicrous.
Opposing this incompetent, out of touch, dishonest coalition should be a breeze. I'm not sure I've ever seen such ill thought through, arrogant nonsense.
If not, and the top job comes available again, my Mum and the lady that works in Tesco's and my postman seem to know exactly what to say. I'm sure they could advise for a small fee.
"Unmarried, disloyal and cold" were the accusations from various callers, though quite what "unmarried" has to do with anything, I don't know.
More worrying was the comment on the article I read that suggested Ed isn't attacking the coalition too hard because he believes that, on the whole they're right. Terrifying thought.
If I were on an hour long phone in for Radio Two, I would find it hard not to descend into spluttering. Where would I start? Would I focus on the astonishingly naive assumption that cutting police officers at a time when crime is bound to rise (it always does when unemployment is rising) and at the same time closing courts, cutting prison places and slashing legal aid won't lead to chaos?
Would I spend the hour trying to convey just what a mash up the Tories are making of the NHS? Would I talk about the funding changes and "efficiency savings" that are cuts by another name? The cancer patients already waiting longer for diagnosis and those needing hip replacements told to now wait in terrible pain as they are no longer a "priority"
Perhaps I would list the endless cuts faced by those who are sick or disabled, focussing on the really churlish, callous and illogical cuts that won't save money, but will cause misery and hardship.
The problem I would have in an hour long interview would be not descending into a kind of ranting, shouting, jumbled up mess as I tried to stay coherent through my fury.
But, the title of this post is "For what it's Worth" and the aim was to share my opinion with Ed about what would set the airwaves alight. It needs cahunas the size of Wales and a raging fire in the belly, but it is honest and brave and most importantly, it sounds a bit Labour. If that isn't too much to ask.
2 Things. First challenge this nonsense on the economy. Over and over and over and over until you sound like a stuck record. We are getting close to a time when Osborne's policies will be those driving the economic data - until now there's been a convenient smattering or the Darling/Brown magic to cushion his glaring incompetence. And yes, I do mean "magic", if this word makes you snigger, then it shows just how unchallenged the Tories are over the economy.
Through the worst recession in living memory, Darling and Brown kept unemployment down, (less than they inherited from the Tories in 97) repossessions were minimised with support for homeowners, inflation stayed reasonable, interest rates were at rock bottom and businesses stayed afloat. Crucially, the deficit went down by 25 billion from measures to support growth and we were predicted to emerge faster and stronger from recession than anywhere else in Europe.
Since Georgie took the helm all of these indicators are at risk and there's no evidence whatsoever that his plan will work. On the contrary, if we look to the 1930's or the post war period, there's every chance it will not. The shadow cabinet should be fearless, mocking and above all confident, that their plan was the right plan and Georgie's is wrong. "Oooh, but Daily Fail readers might laugh." Yes, well, don't worry, we laugh at them every day. The biggest damage done to Labour since the coalition of blue and orange Tories was formed is the fantasy suggestion that we're in this mess because Labour spent all the money. It sounds more ridiculous by the day when the entire world is suffering the same economic woes.
The second attack should be over Labour's record. It won't be fat cat bankers or wealthy businessmen or out of touch politicians who suffer through a Tory 5 years, we know it won't. It will be the poor, the vulnerable, the unemployed and the dispossessed. The very people Labour can claim to have helped the most. However much Murdoch might like to put his own dubious spin on these matters, crime fell by over 40%, unemployment stayed low, youth unemployment was eradicated almost entirely up until the credit crunch, and many decaying and dangerous estates and wastelands were regenerated.
For those about to be clobbered, there is the minimum wage, tax credits, sure start centres, free nursery places for 3 and 4 year olds, employment protection laws, equality rights, civil partnerships, winter fuel payments, free bus passes and TV licenses. Waiting lists went down in our hospitals and on almost every indicator, education improved.
And guess what? The economy thrived. Growth was steady, inflation was low and unemployment fell. Labour proved definitively that they could look after the vulnerable at the same time as supporting growth. To allow that entire record to be buried under the dubious failures of Iraq and civil liberty is ludicrous.
Opposing this incompetent, out of touch, dishonest coalition should be a breeze. I'm not sure I've ever seen such ill thought through, arrogant nonsense.
If not, and the top job comes available again, my Mum and the lady that works in Tesco's and my postman seem to know exactly what to say. I'm sure they could advise for a small fee.
Thursday, 6 January 2011
Update 2
It occurred to me that I didn't mention the surgical ward.
It couldn't have been more different to the medical ward if they'd all spoken Dutch and burst into Guys and Dolls every few minutes.
The first person I saw as I walked onto the ward, was someone I'd known so long, she was practically an old friend. Lindsey, the HCA has worked on the bowel surgery ward ever since I've been availing myself of the facilities. Once - I can't remember what had gone wrong now - she held my hand for three hours as I cried in pain, crying with me.
We got to the nurses station and there was Sarah. Ward Manager, indomitable patient advocate and frighteningly efficient house auction addict. (??!?) Katrina, the staff nurse, Sam the HCA - familiar face after familiar face. Doesn't that say a lot about Sarah? Everyone was smiley, everyone was calm, but most importantly of all, everyone was friendly.
I can't sit here, hand on heart and say things didn't go wrong - twice it took an hour and a half to re-fill my Patient Controlled analgesia pump, discharge took the best part of Christmas day - but the difference, the vital, vital difference, was that it never felt like my fault. When the drugs were late, someone was on the phone to pharmacy constantly, in the end, sending a nurse down to wait until they were ready. When the HCA was busy, she apologised when she came back with a cup of tea we hadn't even asked for. (In the middle of the night, when pain made sleep unlikely for most.) Then she scuttled off and came back with earplugs, as she'd noticed I stuff tissue in my ears for peace.
I asked an HCA to check on me half way through my first shower and she duly called through the door bang on the 5 minutes I asked her to.
Perhaps most importantly, Sarah acted as pain advocate, just as she always does. Funnily enough, I'd seen the pain nurse in the lift a week or two before. She asked how I was (I've known her for years too, but with rather more trepidation.) I told her I was awful, had been shoving needles into my thighs for weeks, but not to worry, she was bound to come and see me 24 hours or so after major surgery and tell me it wasn't a good idea, I might get abscesses, I ought to try a night or two just on paracetamol, blah, blah. I'd tell her she might have suggested it before the massively painful operation and in the end, we'd agree nothing would change, because it's too complicated.
Staggeringly, that's exactly what did happen, just as though she'd never seen me before in my life. Luckily this time I'd asked the medical world and their dogs to write letters about my nasty morphine allergy, my history post surgery of doing just fine at stopping the pain killers and sent her off to read them all. Just at that moment (Xmas Eve) St Sarah of Cambridge came onto the ward with presents for the staff and stopped by for a chat. No sooner had the words "Oh dear, I'm having the pain battle again" left my lips, Sarah was off and a duly chastened pain nurse returned mumbling something about pain teams in the future and left me alone. **
So, no arguments, no nasty nurses, no lazy slackers, no sense that if something went wrong it must be the patient's fault, no bullying, just an attempt to deal with an impossible working life with compassion and humour.
Problem is, when you see one ward doing it......
**I've been BEGGING to see a pain team for over 15 years, it just seems beyond them when I'm not actually causing any problems for anyone again.
It couldn't have been more different to the medical ward if they'd all spoken Dutch and burst into Guys and Dolls every few minutes.
The first person I saw as I walked onto the ward, was someone I'd known so long, she was practically an old friend. Lindsey, the HCA has worked on the bowel surgery ward ever since I've been availing myself of the facilities. Once - I can't remember what had gone wrong now - she held my hand for three hours as I cried in pain, crying with me.
We got to the nurses station and there was Sarah. Ward Manager, indomitable patient advocate and frighteningly efficient house auction addict. (??!?) Katrina, the staff nurse, Sam the HCA - familiar face after familiar face. Doesn't that say a lot about Sarah? Everyone was smiley, everyone was calm, but most importantly of all, everyone was friendly.
I can't sit here, hand on heart and say things didn't go wrong - twice it took an hour and a half to re-fill my Patient Controlled analgesia pump, discharge took the best part of Christmas day - but the difference, the vital, vital difference, was that it never felt like my fault. When the drugs were late, someone was on the phone to pharmacy constantly, in the end, sending a nurse down to wait until they were ready. When the HCA was busy, she apologised when she came back with a cup of tea we hadn't even asked for. (In the middle of the night, when pain made sleep unlikely for most.) Then she scuttled off and came back with earplugs, as she'd noticed I stuff tissue in my ears for peace.
I asked an HCA to check on me half way through my first shower and she duly called through the door bang on the 5 minutes I asked her to.
Perhaps most importantly, Sarah acted as pain advocate, just as she always does. Funnily enough, I'd seen the pain nurse in the lift a week or two before. She asked how I was (I've known her for years too, but with rather more trepidation.) I told her I was awful, had been shoving needles into my thighs for weeks, but not to worry, she was bound to come and see me 24 hours or so after major surgery and tell me it wasn't a good idea, I might get abscesses, I ought to try a night or two just on paracetamol, blah, blah. I'd tell her she might have suggested it before the massively painful operation and in the end, we'd agree nothing would change, because it's too complicated.
Staggeringly, that's exactly what did happen, just as though she'd never seen me before in my life. Luckily this time I'd asked the medical world and their dogs to write letters about my nasty morphine allergy, my history post surgery of doing just fine at stopping the pain killers and sent her off to read them all. Just at that moment (Xmas Eve) St Sarah of Cambridge came onto the ward with presents for the staff and stopped by for a chat. No sooner had the words "Oh dear, I'm having the pain battle again" left my lips, Sarah was off and a duly chastened pain nurse returned mumbling something about pain teams in the future and left me alone. **
So, no arguments, no nasty nurses, no lazy slackers, no sense that if something went wrong it must be the patient's fault, no bullying, just an attempt to deal with an impossible working life with compassion and humour.
Problem is, when you see one ward doing it......
**I've been BEGGING to see a pain team for over 15 years, it just seems beyond them when I'm not actually causing any problems for anyone again.
Wednesday, 5 January 2011
Update
Sun's shining, feeling chipper, kids are cute - I can't bring myself to make you all miserable with some ridiculous coalition faux-pas or piece of callous, Cameron nastiness.
Instead, Dave keeps telling me I should tell you what happened in my op and how things are now.
It flipping hurt, that's the first thing to mention. For about 36hrs afterwards, the combination of ridiculous doses of opiates and goodness-knows what else they give you during surgery, not to mention the fact they get my entire bowel out, (probably a few other organs and things too, I don't know thankfully) check it, run a ball bearing through it to check for blockages, then slice open the ones they find, makes me feel pretty sick. I can tell you here and now that there just can't be a pain worse than trying to vomit when you've just been cut open from sternum to... well, you know.
Coughing's pretty bad too, laughing (and therefore humour of any kind) is banned and sneezing extremely unfortunate, but gagging is unspeakable. As the severed muscles try to comply with the request to gag, they scream in protest, spasm independently, then flatly refuse. You too, scream in protest involuntarily, spasm and gasp, then, if it goes on too long, and you get really lucky, you pass out with the pain or a nurse arrives speedily with an anti emetic. As a point of interest, did you know you can in fact sneeze by making a phthnnnn sound? Oh yes my friends, after bowel surgery, "phthnnn" is your friend.
Anyhow, the good news is, for the first time ever, Mr Genius didn't find a bowel riddled with blockages and ulceration and bits stuck together and bits eaten away. Just a pesky patch of ulceration that he opened up. It was so unlike me, no-one was quite sure if I'd feel better afterwards, or in fact, if something else had made me vomit and writhe so much.
So far (Day 14) I'm feeling just dandy. No pain, no vomiting, eating nice normal sized, normal consistency meals with a healthy smattering of high calorie goodies thrown in to get the weight back on. Everything seems to be in working order and for all those who doubted my fabulousness, opiates are already a thing of the past with no ill effects. Yay for me.
I can think again! I can talk to my boys and see my friends and did I mention the eating bit? I often wonder quite how I adapt to eating a mouthful or two of something bland and soft every two or three days. At first, I'm hungry - amazing how if you're genuinely starving you can feel hungry even when you've just vomited. After a week or so though, you just don't really bother - the danger zone. The weight falls off and suddenly there are no fleshy bits to stick needles into and you can't get down the stairs or talk above a whisper.
Dave is considering installing a conveyor belt to the Tesco Express at the top of the road as I rediscover the great pleasure of yumminess.
"Daaavve." *wheedles*
"Yeees?" *said with great suspicion*
"I think I might fancy a packet of scampi fries/mango/thai fishcake/slice of smoked salmon"
(Silence.)
A few minutes later, boots are hauled on, take-away menus are dug out of cluttered drawers or cupboards are checked and the object of my whim appears. I'm a little emotional from all the trauma and drugs, so if it doesn't arrive, I've been known to cry.
I am a little childish, a teeny bit whiny, and way, way too stubborn for my own good. Not proud you understand, but alive, and in need of a little more TLC than is probably reasonable.
At times the world is a sparkly place, full of possibility and hope and tiny pleasures. Other moments I am desperate, defeated and frightened of the future, but every day the sparkles scrub away the dark places, and I get stronger.
What will I do with my three months? (6 if I'm really lucky?) Well, who knows? In the past I've crossed America coast to coast on the back of a motorbike, or emigrated to Italy or bought a house or had a baby. The heady opiate of freedom is irresistible, the energy you all take for granted, waking up and the first thought isn't "Bleurggggh". It makes me do strange things.
Still, I'm sure you'll all be the first to know ;)
Instead, Dave keeps telling me I should tell you what happened in my op and how things are now.
It flipping hurt, that's the first thing to mention. For about 36hrs afterwards, the combination of ridiculous doses of opiates and goodness-knows what else they give you during surgery, not to mention the fact they get my entire bowel out, (probably a few other organs and things too, I don't know thankfully) check it, run a ball bearing through it to check for blockages, then slice open the ones they find, makes me feel pretty sick. I can tell you here and now that there just can't be a pain worse than trying to vomit when you've just been cut open from sternum to... well, you know.
Coughing's pretty bad too, laughing (and therefore humour of any kind) is banned and sneezing extremely unfortunate, but gagging is unspeakable. As the severed muscles try to comply with the request to gag, they scream in protest, spasm independently, then flatly refuse. You too, scream in protest involuntarily, spasm and gasp, then, if it goes on too long, and you get really lucky, you pass out with the pain or a nurse arrives speedily with an anti emetic. As a point of interest, did you know you can in fact sneeze by making a phthnnnn sound? Oh yes my friends, after bowel surgery, "phthnnn" is your friend.
Anyhow, the good news is, for the first time ever, Mr Genius didn't find a bowel riddled with blockages and ulceration and bits stuck together and bits eaten away. Just a pesky patch of ulceration that he opened up. It was so unlike me, no-one was quite sure if I'd feel better afterwards, or in fact, if something else had made me vomit and writhe so much.
So far (Day 14) I'm feeling just dandy. No pain, no vomiting, eating nice normal sized, normal consistency meals with a healthy smattering of high calorie goodies thrown in to get the weight back on. Everything seems to be in working order and for all those who doubted my fabulousness, opiates are already a thing of the past with no ill effects. Yay for me.
I can think again! I can talk to my boys and see my friends and did I mention the eating bit? I often wonder quite how I adapt to eating a mouthful or two of something bland and soft every two or three days. At first, I'm hungry - amazing how if you're genuinely starving you can feel hungry even when you've just vomited. After a week or so though, you just don't really bother - the danger zone. The weight falls off and suddenly there are no fleshy bits to stick needles into and you can't get down the stairs or talk above a whisper.
Dave is considering installing a conveyor belt to the Tesco Express at the top of the road as I rediscover the great pleasure of yumminess.
"Daaavve." *wheedles*
"Yeees?" *said with great suspicion*
"I think I might fancy a packet of scampi fries/mango/thai fishcake/slice of smoked salmon"
(Silence.)
A few minutes later, boots are hauled on, take-away menus are dug out of cluttered drawers or cupboards are checked and the object of my whim appears. I'm a little emotional from all the trauma and drugs, so if it doesn't arrive, I've been known to cry.
I am a little childish, a teeny bit whiny, and way, way too stubborn for my own good. Not proud you understand, but alive, and in need of a little more TLC than is probably reasonable.
At times the world is a sparkly place, full of possibility and hope and tiny pleasures. Other moments I am desperate, defeated and frightened of the future, but every day the sparkles scrub away the dark places, and I get stronger.
What will I do with my three months? (6 if I'm really lucky?) Well, who knows? In the past I've crossed America coast to coast on the back of a motorbike, or emigrated to Italy or bought a house or had a baby. The heady opiate of freedom is irresistible, the energy you all take for granted, waking up and the first thought isn't "Bleurggggh". It makes me do strange things.
Still, I'm sure you'll all be the first to know ;)
Tuesday, 4 January 2011
George Osborne, The Artful Tax Dodger
Funny really. There's something about him. I always imagine little Georgie Osborne in a Victorian tailcoat, rubbing his hands together like Scrooge. This morning, the country will instead see him as the Artful Dodger as they munch their cornflakes and open their newspapers.
In every daily, there he is, ducking and diving and cheating his tax. On the day VAT goes up to 20% - a Tory tax incidentally, they always race to put it up - there he is in his top hat laughing at you.
http://www.labourlist.org/the_conservatives_cant_be_trusted_on_vat
I thought I'd share some lyrics with you. Oh how apt they are. Oh how I love musicals.
Perhaps at first we imagine Osborne's (Dodger) talking to a naive, wide eyed Clegg, (Oliver) taking his first, blinking steps in the palace of Westminster? Osborne's friend, Cameron, (Fagin) would just love to meet him!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yPGRUrvuNGk&feature=related
Before he knows it, they're making him feel so at home.....
Consider yourself at home.
Consider yourself one of the family.
We've taken to you so strong.
It's clear we're going to get along.
Consider yourself well in
Consider yourself part of the furniture.
There isn't a lot to spare.
Who cares?..What ever we've got we share!
If it should chance to be
We should see
Some harder days
Empty larder days
Why grouse?
Always a-chance we'll meet
Somebody
To foot the bill
Then the drinks are on the house!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_LzmdovYoAI
How was Klosters George?
Far better you cheat dear boy! Cameron will tell you how it's done (Fagin)
[sung] In this life, one thing counts
In the bank, large amounts
I'm afraid these don't grow on trees,
You've got to pick-a-pocket or two
You've got to pick-a-pocket or two, boys,
You've got to pick-a-pocket or two.
[BOYS]
Large amounts don't grow on trees.
You've got to pick-a-pocket or two.
[FAGIN (spoken)]
Let's show Oliver how it's done, shall we, my dears?
[sung] Why should we break our backs
Stupidly paying tax?
Better get some untaxed income
Better to pick-a-pocket or two.
You've got to pick-a-pocket or two, boys
You've got to pick-a-pocket or two.
[BOYS]
Why should we all break our backs?
Better pick-a-pocket or two.
[FAGIN (spoken)]
Who says crime doesn't pay?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-HazQlWgdzg&feature=related
And the offshore accounts Mr Osborne? "Why should you break your back, stupidly paying tax?" Why indeed, when you can pick the pockets of the sick and disabled, our children and the poor?
The real Fagin would be turning in his grave.
And finally, it's worth remembering, he really will do anything.
[DODGER (spoken)]
Dance, Nancy.
[NANCY (spoken)]
Oh, alright, Dodge. C'mon boys!
1-2-3...
[FAGIN]
Would you rob a shop?
[ALL]
Anything!
[FAGIN]
Would you risk the "drop"?
[ALL]
Anything!
[FAGIN]
Tho' your eyes go, 'pop'
[ALL]
Anything!
[FAGIN]
When you come down 'plop'
[ALL]
Hang ev'rything!
We'd risk life and limb
To keep you in the swim
Yes, we'd do anything...
[FAGIN]
Anything?!
[ALL]
Anything for you.
And they really will do anything won't they?
Would you stuff the poor?
Anything!
Change protection laws?
Anything!
Slam shut every door?
Anything
If they ask for more?
I'd let em starve.....
I'd do anything,
For rich, pals, anything
Yes I'd do Anything..
Anything?
Anything for Blue.
Update: Yep, you guessed it, the Telegraph and Mail pulled the ads. http://www.leftfootforward.org/2011/01/mail-and-telegraph-pull-anti-tax-dodging-ads/
In every daily, there he is, ducking and diving and cheating his tax. On the day VAT goes up to 20% - a Tory tax incidentally, they always race to put it up - there he is in his top hat laughing at you.
http://www.labourlist.org/the_conservatives_cant_be_trusted_on_vat
I thought I'd share some lyrics with you. Oh how apt they are. Oh how I love musicals.
Perhaps at first we imagine Osborne's (Dodger) talking to a naive, wide eyed Clegg, (Oliver) taking his first, blinking steps in the palace of Westminster? Osborne's friend, Cameron, (Fagin) would just love to meet him!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yPGRUrvuNGk&feature=related
Before he knows it, they're making him feel so at home.....
Consider yourself at home.
Consider yourself one of the family.
We've taken to you so strong.
It's clear we're going to get along.
Consider yourself well in
Consider yourself part of the furniture.
There isn't a lot to spare.
Who cares?..What ever we've got we share!
If it should chance to be
We should see
Some harder days
Empty larder days
Why grouse?
Always a-chance we'll meet
Somebody
To foot the bill
Then the drinks are on the house!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_LzmdovYoAI
How was Klosters George?
Far better you cheat dear boy! Cameron will tell you how it's done (Fagin)
[sung] In this life, one thing counts
In the bank, large amounts
I'm afraid these don't grow on trees,
You've got to pick-a-pocket or two
You've got to pick-a-pocket or two, boys,
You've got to pick-a-pocket or two.
[BOYS]
Large amounts don't grow on trees.
You've got to pick-a-pocket or two.
[FAGIN (spoken)]
Let's show Oliver how it's done, shall we, my dears?
[sung] Why should we break our backs
Stupidly paying tax?
Better get some untaxed income
Better to pick-a-pocket or two.
You've got to pick-a-pocket or two, boys
You've got to pick-a-pocket or two.
[BOYS]
Why should we all break our backs?
Better pick-a-pocket or two.
[FAGIN (spoken)]
Who says crime doesn't pay?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-HazQlWgdzg&feature=related
And the offshore accounts Mr Osborne? "Why should you break your back, stupidly paying tax?" Why indeed, when you can pick the pockets of the sick and disabled, our children and the poor?
The real Fagin would be turning in his grave.
And finally, it's worth remembering, he really will do anything.
[DODGER (spoken)]
Dance, Nancy.
[NANCY (spoken)]
Oh, alright, Dodge. C'mon boys!
1-2-3...
[FAGIN]
Would you rob a shop?
[ALL]
Anything!
[FAGIN]
Would you risk the "drop"?
[ALL]
Anything!
[FAGIN]
Tho' your eyes go, 'pop'
[ALL]
Anything!
[FAGIN]
When you come down 'plop'
[ALL]
Hang ev'rything!
We'd risk life and limb
To keep you in the swim
Yes, we'd do anything...
[FAGIN]
Anything?!
[ALL]
Anything for you.
And they really will do anything won't they?
Would you stuff the poor?
Anything!
Change protection laws?
Anything!
Slam shut every door?
Anything
If they ask for more?
I'd let em starve.....
I'd do anything,
For rich, pals, anything
Yes I'd do Anything..
Anything?
Anything for Blue.
Update: Yep, you guessed it, the Telegraph and Mail pulled the ads. http://www.leftfootforward.org/2011/01/mail-and-telegraph-pull-anti-tax-dodging-ads/
Sunday, 2 January 2011
Do you Care about the NHS?
The article below is why I think this government are really, really stupid.
It's the short sightedness you see. When is a saving not a saving? When it costs more than it saves.
The article starts by saying that mental health issues cost the country 105 Billion a year. 105 Billion!! You could practically wipe out the deficit at a stroke if it wasn't an issue. Now, obviously, I'm not claiming that's possible, but research is much less than on cancer or heart disease - just 75 million a year. Those with mental health issues are more likely to die of cancer or a heart attack, but we don't really know why. Labour had pledged to raise research funding from 2% to 11% of the overall research budget, but this is reported to be missing from Lansley's plans, due to be released shortly.
And that's the stupid bit. Stupid, stupid, stupid. According to those that know - The head of the Mental Health Foundation and the Institute of Psychiatry - Every pound spent in research will pay for itself in just three years. Just like the Film council that made £5 for every £1 it was given from the government. Or EMA's, which paid for themselves with some ridiculously low take up figure.
So, I know it's counter-intuitive, I know most of you don't believe me yet, I know you all think Gideon's axe needs to swing, but CUTS DON'T USUALLY SAVE MONEY. Well spent government money, targeted at improving outcomes just mean the public end up paying less in the long run. Perhaps there were schemes that were badly run. Fine, slash away. But if something saves money in the long run, leave it alone.
That money needs to be saved. Somewhere, we do need to find some cash. We could look in Sir Philip "Top Shop" Green's deep, tax-avoiding pockets. We could ask Gideon and his many trustafarian pals to bring their considerable wealth into UK jurisdiction and demand that they pay full UK tax on it. (See Artful Dodger ads to appear in all major newspapers on Tuesday, the day of the VAT rise). We could stop giving tax relief altogether on those who can afford to pay tens of thousands a month into private pensions. Not tax them mind, stop not taxing them. We could crack down on tax havens. We could ask Vodafone to pay the 6 Billion in tax they were allegedly allowed to not bother with. We could bring in that Robin Hood Tax, that just takes a tiny, tiny, fraction of every banking transaction but generates billions in revenue. http://robinhoodtax.org/
The alternative is terrifying. We just don't care about the implications of cutting vital research, support and care. Are we really so naive that we believe the country was sucked dry by hoards of faking sickies, immigrants and dole cheats? Sure there were some, but they sucked several hundred billion less than the bankers. Anyone know how much our banks have paid back of the more than 800 billion they demanded to pay for their greed? Don't you think we should?
The alternative is we leave sick patients to die, we leave the mentally ill untreated, we leave the elderly uncared for, we leave the disabled with no support and on and on and on. Do you want to live in that place?
This article, from the Independent, is a brilliantly comprehensive collection of all the broken promises and outright lies the Conservatives told about health in the run up to the election. Just health mind you, never mind the other departments.
http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/health-news/lansley-faces-flak-over-yet-another-broken-promise-on-healthcare-2174159.html
It is not a matter for debate. You can't read it and say, "Oh, well, she would say that." The statistics are all there, the dates and even places of every broken promise, all catalogued. What's more, they are not just Lansley's broken promises, (Health Minister) they are Cameron's. Time and again, he jumped on the bandwagon of the day, promising to improve mental health research, increase midwife numbers, to invest in the NHS, to protect frontline services and improve patient care. Time and again, he's stayed quiet when some Tory minister or another has broken these promises.
I've just spent a month or so in one of the country's flagship hospitals. Where there used to be 6 trained nurses on every shift, there are now three. If you're lucky and no-one calls in sick. Patient's are already being left in their own filth, left in agony for want of some painkillers, drugs are forgotten, pharmacy's are taking hours to fill orders, tests are taking weeks longer, operations are being cancelled, hip replacements and cataracts are now no longer considered a priority, sick patient's are being sent home too soon, wards are closing, midwife numbers have fallen and beds are becoming scarce. The NHS has been asked to make 20 Billion in "Efficiency Savings". Well, they're not efficiency savings, they're cuts, and rumour has it another 10 Billion are on the way. The NHS isn't ring-fenced, it's being strangled.
We can wait, if you like. We can watch people suffer, we can watch people die, we can believe it's necessary to make the sick pay for the greed of the super-rich. We can leave disabled people to rot, we can make tens of thousands of people homeless, we can cut school funding and let the NHS be privatised against the wishes of 90% of it's staff.
Or we can wake up. We can stop sleepwalking into a disaster and we can stop believing the lies Mr Murdoch and Mr Cameron and Mr Osborne and all the others are telling us.
Happy 2011. Which is it to be?
It's the short sightedness you see. When is a saving not a saving? When it costs more than it saves.
The article starts by saying that mental health issues cost the country 105 Billion a year. 105 Billion!! You could practically wipe out the deficit at a stroke if it wasn't an issue. Now, obviously, I'm not claiming that's possible, but research is much less than on cancer or heart disease - just 75 million a year. Those with mental health issues are more likely to die of cancer or a heart attack, but we don't really know why. Labour had pledged to raise research funding from 2% to 11% of the overall research budget, but this is reported to be missing from Lansley's plans, due to be released shortly.
And that's the stupid bit. Stupid, stupid, stupid. According to those that know - The head of the Mental Health Foundation and the Institute of Psychiatry - Every pound spent in research will pay for itself in just three years. Just like the Film council that made £5 for every £1 it was given from the government. Or EMA's, which paid for themselves with some ridiculously low take up figure.
So, I know it's counter-intuitive, I know most of you don't believe me yet, I know you all think Gideon's axe needs to swing, but CUTS DON'T USUALLY SAVE MONEY. Well spent government money, targeted at improving outcomes just mean the public end up paying less in the long run. Perhaps there were schemes that were badly run. Fine, slash away. But if something saves money in the long run, leave it alone.
That money needs to be saved. Somewhere, we do need to find some cash. We could look in Sir Philip "Top Shop" Green's deep, tax-avoiding pockets. We could ask Gideon and his many trustafarian pals to bring their considerable wealth into UK jurisdiction and demand that they pay full UK tax on it. (See Artful Dodger ads to appear in all major newspapers on Tuesday, the day of the VAT rise). We could stop giving tax relief altogether on those who can afford to pay tens of thousands a month into private pensions. Not tax them mind, stop not taxing them. We could crack down on tax havens. We could ask Vodafone to pay the 6 Billion in tax they were allegedly allowed to not bother with. We could bring in that Robin Hood Tax, that just takes a tiny, tiny, fraction of every banking transaction but generates billions in revenue. http://robinhoodtax.org/
The alternative is terrifying. We just don't care about the implications of cutting vital research, support and care. Are we really so naive that we believe the country was sucked dry by hoards of faking sickies, immigrants and dole cheats? Sure there were some, but they sucked several hundred billion less than the bankers. Anyone know how much our banks have paid back of the more than 800 billion they demanded to pay for their greed? Don't you think we should?
The alternative is we leave sick patients to die, we leave the mentally ill untreated, we leave the elderly uncared for, we leave the disabled with no support and on and on and on. Do you want to live in that place?
This article, from the Independent, is a brilliantly comprehensive collection of all the broken promises and outright lies the Conservatives told about health in the run up to the election. Just health mind you, never mind the other departments.
http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/health-news/lansley-faces-flak-over-yet-another-broken-promise-on-healthcare-2174159.html
It is not a matter for debate. You can't read it and say, "Oh, well, she would say that." The statistics are all there, the dates and even places of every broken promise, all catalogued. What's more, they are not just Lansley's broken promises, (Health Minister) they are Cameron's. Time and again, he jumped on the bandwagon of the day, promising to improve mental health research, increase midwife numbers, to invest in the NHS, to protect frontline services and improve patient care. Time and again, he's stayed quiet when some Tory minister or another has broken these promises.
I've just spent a month or so in one of the country's flagship hospitals. Where there used to be 6 trained nurses on every shift, there are now three. If you're lucky and no-one calls in sick. Patient's are already being left in their own filth, left in agony for want of some painkillers, drugs are forgotten, pharmacy's are taking hours to fill orders, tests are taking weeks longer, operations are being cancelled, hip replacements and cataracts are now no longer considered a priority, sick patient's are being sent home too soon, wards are closing, midwife numbers have fallen and beds are becoming scarce. The NHS has been asked to make 20 Billion in "Efficiency Savings". Well, they're not efficiency savings, they're cuts, and rumour has it another 10 Billion are on the way. The NHS isn't ring-fenced, it's being strangled.
We can wait, if you like. We can watch people suffer, we can watch people die, we can believe it's necessary to make the sick pay for the greed of the super-rich. We can leave disabled people to rot, we can make tens of thousands of people homeless, we can cut school funding and let the NHS be privatised against the wishes of 90% of it's staff.
Or we can wake up. We can stop sleepwalking into a disaster and we can stop believing the lies Mr Murdoch and Mr Cameron and Mr Osborne and all the others are telling us.
Happy 2011. Which is it to be?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)