Royal Oldham Hospital

If this was not so serious it would be a joke!

When you shut other A&E departments most people would expect the footfall to increase - it is not rocket science.

Many, many times this wonderful hospital has failed us, when will somebody do something to solve the problem?

We read almost weekly that it has failed this or that, let people die through poor services - so who is accountable?

Fairfield now has only limited A&E services, often blocking up desperately needed ambulances with transfers to other hospitals.

Maybe the time has come to re-open some of the closed A&E departments.

.

It has been apparent for many years now that the 'dumping' of 'other' services on the NHS has over-burdened what was already a heavily burdened organisation - to the obvious detriment of that organisation. The answer lies in those 'burdens' being removed asap. However there are insufficient funds to do this under the present austerity measures required by the country to redress the imbalance left by the financial rape that took place in the previous ten years prior to the financial crash. Anyone who thinks, given all the other necessities we require, that this can be done without 'pain' by the populace needs a brain transplant. The 'pain' will always fall on the weakest first. The NHS being a prime contender. What is to be done? A change of emphasis. A change of priorities. A change of leadership. Best of luck with that one Keith.

The many, many hundreds of refugees we have has not helped to push our services into crisis.

Maybe we should shut the flood gates and divert them to places like Westminster which I am told has none!

http://www.rochdaleonline.co.uk/news-features/2/news-headlines/102021/royal-oldham-hospital-urges-public-to-stay-away-from-aande-unless-its-a-real-emergency-as-staff-see-record-numbers

.

I would imagine that the local council are granted a certain amount of 'relief' money for every 'refugee' they house. Whilst this is no doubt useful at the outset I doubt much care is taken to 'assess' the ongoing costs both to services and care in the longer term. I think you would need to get over this hurdle initially before cattle-trucking them away back to Westminster (who would only send them back anyway). It is what it is KeithatRochdale - just one extra burden on the deprived North which you will have to bear and over which you have no control.

There seems more hope for Syria now, with the Syrian army re-taking the city of Palmyra. Peaceful population will be needed, and reconstruction jobs should go to Syrians. Refugees might soon be able to start thinking about returning to Syria.

Sorting out the north-south divide and the NHS is of course rather a deeper problem within our own domestic politics.

Syria - - -a long way to go yet. Two years min possibly more before re-construction can begin as a best case scenario. Some will return eventually but the majority now out of it will want to stay out of it. Rods for our own backs -NHS & Housing & Education. All over -burdened, all insurmountable under present funding and policies, all for a future generation to get to grips with and possibly change back to a public/private system whereby the majority will survive and the minority will suffer. You can't change what cannot be changed. Man isn't that clever. His arrogance takes care of that.

I don't know what our laws are about giving asylum to refugees from war, but it would seem reasonable to expect them to return to their own countries when it is safe to do so. Otherwise it would provide a perverse incentive for poor countries to generate wars in order to move their surplus populations to richer countries.

Refugees should always be returned whence they came if the situation is safe for them to do so ----
However ----- During the process some will have married indigenous spouses. Some will have health problems which require they 'stay' until 'well'. Some will have had children born here as British citizens and cannot be sent back with the parents. Some will have disappeared into the woodwork and some will fight at a heavy cost to the tax payer. In all - 50% won't return for one reason or another.
It's never as simple as it sounds. Free borders and free movement is the 21stc mantra. Good luck with that.

Americans seem to be angry and divided, and about similar issues, the economy, immigration, job losses, health care, ineffective politicians, unpopular wars and foreign policies, with the popularity of Mr. Trump arising from that. Europeans seem a bit cheesed off as well, will we see some euro-trump politicians doing copy-cat campaigns?

The politicians that make a difference to events, like Hitler, Mrs. Thatcher, and other less outstanding examples, Blair, Brown, etc all seem to be psycho-mainiacs of one kind or another. Is Trump a looney?

No. He's a 'main chancer'. Sees an opening and attaches his coat tails to it. Entrepreneur malicious.
He never began by thinking he could win the nomination of the Republicans for the Presidency. That only became apparent when he realised the depth of unrest amongst the American voter and that they would take any outlandish outbursts he made and sugar-coat them for him. Loony left loony right loony in-between. All will rally to his banner in a bid to exact change. What change they haven't a clue!! Just so long as it's a change.
I credit the mass of the American people with more intelligence and would expect if he wins the nomination they will then rally against his bid and vote for the Democrat nominee and keep him out. They really are not going to benefit from a President Trump - whatever his politics.
We already have similar 'outlandish' politicians scattered around Europe - Farage for one - who will make bids to 'colour' the waters a different hue of the rainbow. We will have to see, here, following the referendum just how far they get and what the consequences will be in Europe for the usual 'acceptable' candidates. I suspect France will be one of the first to fall 'right'. It's in their nature.

The comparison between Mr. Trump and Nigel Farage seems rather far-fetched. Mr. Trump seems able to barge his way past the opinion predicters in the USA, perhaps because he has very little credible opposition.

Only in that Farage has more intelligence. It's the 'sound-bite' approach that's similar. Grab the attention of the knee-jerkers and play to the crowd. Trump is far-right Fascist. Farage is middle-road Imperialist. Both benefit from 'off with their heads' lunatics and the less well educated mob meander'ers. Both promise change - tomorrow. Like I said - one hopes the American public have a larger percentage of 'common-sense' individuals who will see through the 'crap' and vote for the 'reasonable'. We shall see.

There's a saying about the USA and Britain being divided by a common language. There is certainly a different way of understanding things.

Mr. Farage seems more of a quietly away sort of character than a rabble rouser. He has been patiently explaining what a mess the european project is for a long time.

Facts are still thin on the ground about brexiting, simple logic says it should help the NHS, but, simple logic is of limited use in politics.

I know the saying and it includes plus 3.000 miles of troubled waters.That bit is always left out.
Our ideas and politics are not the same - and haven't been since the Boston tea-party.
There is an arrogance in 'youth' borne out by life's experience. American's have that in spades and as always it's lacking in experience. As much as they always rant on about 'freedoms' their society is patently more 'capitalist' than is ours and they lack the 'freedom' that social cohesion can bring. It's one thing to promote individual self-determination, it's quite another to allow it to rule at the expense of the less well endowed or capable. We might be 'imperialist' minded but I would put that against any 'capitalist' minded expansionism any minute of the day. One just hopes they have been 'mixed' sufficiently by now to promote a more 'socialist' society to come to the fore - and not the Trump variety.
Farage will grab at the heart strings to better his cause. He may be right in the long run. We shall have to wait and see.
The NHS is 'too big' and lacks cohesion as a consequence. It needs chopping up into smaller units to benefit itself. I believe moves are afoot to do this - hmmmmmmmm -.