Jump to content

Recommended Posts

ratty Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> People have such short memories. If you think the

> county is in trouble now it is nothing compared to

> what the tories will do to it. It'll be a sad day

> when that bunch of bastards get back into power!

> :(


Agree! That disgusting smug rodent-faced organic champagne-swilling creature Cameron and his toff pals will make this country even worse. I pray they do not win the election.

Marmora Man, I think the problem with this kind of letter is that its weaker points, some of which seem a bit bizarre and edge towards the green ink, detract from the central accusation, which is that as the FSA is Brown's baby, and the FSA's failure is Brown's failure - which makes Brown wholly responsibile for the economic situation.


That's as may be, but the problem for the Tories is that it just doesn't wash with people to hint they would have been for tougher regulation, for telling the bankers to rein it in. If Brown had tried any of that who do you think would have been accusing him of stifling creativity and wealth creation with red tape - and making our financial sector less competitive.


Also, people are aware that we are not the only country in the schtuck. Sure, we are heavily exposed, due to a reliance on the financial and services sector. People are also aware why we are so reliant on these sectors, it is the flipside for many (no doubt you would disagree) of the collapse in our manufacturing sector. Making it stick as Brown's crisis takes more than a dislike of the man and tribal partisanship.


It's politics, so people are going to play these tricks. But you don't have to believe in it, surely, as an advocate, in the recent past on the EDF, of serious debate.

The thought that this awful, incompetent, lying, corrupt, liberty removing shower MIGHT even get back in....will, I think, mean that, with no great faith, I'll be voting Tory for the first time in my life....my dad will spin in his grave....but there's no way they deserve any longer in office...


I might just turn back to anarchy

Have you seen how useless Harriet Harman is? i wouldn't put her in charge of my Sunday lunch....if Brown got assasintaed (please god please) she'd be stepping in....


Talk about champagne swilling tories.....That twat Milliband from a family of middleclass Hampstead 'socialists'.....got into Oxford with crap A levels...on a scheme for deprived inner city kids!!!!....lecturing us on equality and opportinity for the deprived, and talked about being a future PM.....fuck off you thick twat


Mandleson...I mean... bunged out of cabinet twice for unethical behaviour, slease bag beyond belief, false mortgage, dodgy friends....another 'socialist' whith family links to the Labour party...still sitting on a ?1m euro-pension, nice work if you've never done a proper job


Tony Blair...where do we start...if we can get him out of his Buckinghamshire mansion, Bayswater townhouse or ?million pound lecture tour, I'd like to ask him about those WMDs...still, a good catholic he can confess all that guilt away



Gordon Brown - no proper job ever, hubristic, no vision, a dour, scottish socialist bully of a twat,with no proper intellect, who has well and truly fucked us up and whose egoism means he won't even show a slither of contrition for this


Labour are a bunch of awful hypocritical slimebags ...I'm gonna give the posh, champagne swilling twats arun at it

But Quids, in 10 years time you'll be saying the same things about another Tory Gov't, have you already forgotten the Major sleaze years?...there's a huge vacuum in British politics waiting to be filled, and Cameron ain't the man...

*dusts down old copy of The Jam's Eton Rifles and reminisces about the good old days*

I'm no fan of the Tories, but the Major sleaze was mostly of the Secretary shagging sort coupled with a misguided sense of arrogance and invulnerability. Labour sleaze, almost from day one with the Ecclestone F1 bribe has been much more insidious and much more corrupt. They've single handedly dragged Britain a few slots down in the world corruption index.


Scum, utter scum the lot of them. Agree about Harman, though would put Blears at the top of the hideous, self-serving, unprincipled scumbag list.

What do you think, Marmora Man?


I think the charge sheet as laid out by Steven Katarai is valid as a set of allegations (despite the spelling errors). I don't think Gordon Brown is single handedly responsible for every ill set out in the letter but he did have a hand in all of them to a greater or lesser extent; he and the Labour Party should answer the charges or give way to another political party. Of course they will do neither. Brown is a formidable political operator (not the same as a formidable politician and he is certainly no statesman) who has marched rough shod over his rivals in Labour - resulting in him being the biggest shark in a murky pool of minnows. At the same he has used weasel words and actions to avoid taking any responsibility for any of the issues - the standing of politicians is now lower than it was in 1997, quite an achievement for the supposedly moral party.


His apparent inability to admit that he has ever been wrong or in error is actually doing him more political harm than such an admittedly damaging admission would be. Somehow he can't see this.


The knee jerk reaction by some posters against the Tories is small minded. Politics and political decisions should not be tribal affairs but a rational argument - I would argue that the current government has:


a. Run out of steam

b. Achieved very little in its 12 years of power. Particularly so given the enthusiasm that greeted its arrival - it had both the opportunity and the political good will to make a real difference to many - to reform the NHS, reform education, transform relations with our European neighbours - but it has squandered all this. The only piece of New Labour legislation that I can wholeheartedly support if the anti smoking bill.

c. Become little more than a squabbling group of small minded individuals rather than a party in power; it is more reminiscent of student debating society during Freshers week.


The Tory opposition is still weak on too many key areas - I would wish it was more positive, was publicising the true cost of New Labour's errors and proposing costed solutions to the problem(s). The Conservative party has not taken the real lead it should have as an opposition given the poverty of the government's arguments but it is beginning to work out a coherent set of policies on the economy and in other areas.


I would recommend anyone interested in social justice to look at the output of Ian Duncan Smith's Council for Social Justice think tank. Many of their emerging policies and thinking are based in reality and developed in conjunction with people who have lived with and through the actuality of poverty.

I would totally agree with pretty much every word of that MM, with exception to the penultimate paragraph.


I'd suggest their opposition isn't so much 'too weak' as that it hasn't come up with a cogent set of alternative policies and are reduced to point scoring.


As usual I think the liberals are performing the best here (I didn't say anyone was really running with it, but best of a mediocre bunch) but as usual they will never receive a political mandate to give it a go. We're a pretty unimaginative and conservative (small c!!) electorate when it comes down to it.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • The is very low water pressure in the middle of Friern Road this morning.
    • I think mostly those are related to the same "issues". In my experience, it's difficult using the pin when reporting problems, especially if you're on a mobile... There's two obvious leaks in that stretch and has been for sometime one of them apparently being sewer flooding 😱  
    • BBC Homepage Skip to content Accessibility Help EFor you Notifications More menu Search BBC                     BBC News Menu   UK England N. Ireland Scotland Alba Wales Cymru Isle of Man Guernsey Jersey Local News Vets under corporate pressure to increase revenue, BBC told   Image source,Getty Images ByRichard Bilton, BBC Panorama and Ben Milne, BBC News Published 2 hours ago Vets have told BBC Panorama they feel under increasing pressure to make money for the big companies that employ them - and worry about the costly financial impact on pet owners. Prices charged by UK vets rose by 63% between 2016 and 2023, external, and the government's competition regulator has questioned whether the pet-care market - as it stands - is giving customers value for money. One anonymous vet, who works for the UK's largest vet care provider, IVC Evidensia, said that the company has introduced a new monitoring system that could encourage vets to offer pet owners costly tests and treatment options. A spokesperson for IVC told Panorama: "The group's vets and vet nurses never prioritise revenue or transaction value over and above the welfare of the animal in their care." More than half of all UK households are thought to own a pet, external. Over the past few months, hundreds of pet owners have contacted BBC Your Voice with concerns about vet bills. One person said they had paid £5,600 for 18 hours of vet-care for their pet: "I would have paid anything to save him but felt afterwards we had been taken advantage of." Another described how their dog had undergone numerous blood tests and scans: "At the end of the treatment we were none the wiser about her illness and we were presented with a bill of £13,000."   Image caption, UK pet owners spent £6.3bn on vet and other pet-care services in 2024, according to the CMA Mounting concerns over whether pet owners are receiving a fair deal prompted a formal investigation by government watchdog, the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA). In a provisional report, external at the end of last year, it identified several issues: Whether vet companies are being transparent about the ownership of individual practices and whether pet owners have enough information about pricing The concentration of vet practices and clinics in the hands of six companies - these now control 60% of the UK's pet-care market Whether this concentration has led to less market competition and allowed some vet care companies to make excess profits 'Hitting targets' A vet, who leads one of IVC's surgeries (and who does not want to be identified because they fear they could lose their job), has shared a new internal document with Panorama. The document uses a colour code to compare the company's UK-wide tests and treatment options and states that it is intended to help staff improve clinical care. It lists key performance indicators in categories that include average sales per patient, X-rays, ultrasound and lab tests. The vet is worried about the new policy: "We will have meetings every month, where one of the area teams will ask you how many blood tests, X-rays and ultrasounds you're doing." If a category is marked in green on the chart, the clinic would be judged to be among the company's top 25% of achievers in the UK. A red mark, on the other hand, would mean the clinic was in the bottom 25%. If this happens, the vet says, it might be asked to come up with a plan of action. The vet says this would create pressure to "upsell" services. Panorama: Why are vet bills so high? Are people being priced out of pet ownership by soaring bills? Watch on BBC iPlayer now or BBC One at 20:00 on Monday 12 January (22:40 in Northern Ireland) Watch on iPlayer For instance, the vet says, under the new model, IVC would prefer any animal with suspected osteoarthritis to potentially be X-rayed. With sedation, that could add £700 to a bill. While X-rays are sometimes necessary, the vet says, the signs of osteoarthritis - the thickening of joints, for instance - could be obvious to an experienced vet, who might prefer to prescribe a less expensive anti-inflammatory treatment. "Vets shouldn't have pressure to do an X-ray because it would play into whether they are getting green on the care framework for their clinic." IVC has told Panorama it is extremely proud of the work its clinical teams do and the data it collects is to "identify and close gaps in care for our patients". It says its vets have "clinical independence", and that prioritising revenue over care would be against the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons' (RCVS) code and IVC policy. Vets say they are under pressure to bring in more money per pet   Published 15 April 2025 Vets should be made to publish prices, watchdog says   Published 15 October 2025 The vet says a drive to increase revenue is undermining his profession. Panorama spoke to more than 30 vets in total who are currently working, or have worked, for some of the large veterinary groups. One recalls being told that not enough blood tests were being taken: "We were pushed to do more. I hated opening emails." Another says that when their small practice was sold to a large company, "it was crazy... It was all about hitting targets". Not all the big companies set targets or monitor staff in this way. The high cost of treatment UK pet owners spent £6.3bn on vet and other pet-care services in 2024 - equal to just over £365 per pet-owning household, according to the CMA. However, most pet owners in the UK do not have insurance, and bills can leave less-well-off families feeling helpless when treatment is needed. Many vets used not to display prices and pet owners often had no clear idea of what treatment would cost, but in the past two years that has improved, according to the CMA. Rob Jones has told Panorama that when his family dog, Betty, fell ill during the autumn of 2024 they took her to an emergency treatment centre, Vets Now, and she underwent an operation that cost almost £5,000. Twelve days later, Betty was still unwell, and Rob says he was advised that she could have a serious infection. He was told a diagnosis - and another operation - would cost between £5,000-£8,000.   Image caption, Betty's owners were told an operation on her would cost £12,000 However, on the morning of the operation, Rob was told this price had risen to £12,000. When he complained, he was quoted a new figure - £10,000. "That was the absolute point where I lost faith in them," he says. "It was like, I don't believe that you've got our interests or Betty's interests at heart." The family decided to put Betty to sleep. Rob did not know at the time that both his local vet, and the emergency centre, branded Vets Now, where Betty was treated, were both owned by the same company - IVC. He was happy with the treatment but complained about the sudden price increase and later received an apology from Vets Now. It offered him £3,755.59 as a "goodwill gesture".   Image caption, Rob Jones says he lost faith in the vets treating his pet dog Betty Vets Now told us its staff care passionately for the animals they treat: "In complex cases, prices can vary depending on what the vet discovers during a consultation, during the treatment, and depending on how the patient responds. "We have reviewed our processes and implemented a number of changes to ensure that conversations about pricing are as clear as possible." Value for money? Independent vet practices have been a popular acquisition for corporate investors in recent years, according to Dr David Reader from the University of Glasgow. He has made a detailed study of the industry. Pet care has been seen as attractive, he says, because of the opportunities "to find efficiencies, to consolidate, set up regional hubs, but also to maximise profits". Six large veterinary groups (sometimes referred to as LVGs) now control 60% of the UK pet care market - up from 10% a decade ago, according to the CMA, external. They are: Linnaeus, which owns 180 practices Medivet, which has 363 Vet Partners with 375 practices CVS Group, which has 387 practices Pets at Home, which has 445 practices under the name Vets for Pets IVC Evidensia, which has 900 practices When the CMA announced its provisional findings last autumn, it said there was not enough competition or informed choice in the market. It estimated the combined cost of this to UK pet owners amounted to £900m between 2020-2024. Corporate vets dispute the £900m figure. They say their prices are competitive and made freely available, and reflect their huge investment in the industry, not to mention rising costs, particularly of drugs. The corporate vets also say customers value their services highly and that they comply with the RCVS guidelines.   Image caption, A CMA survey suggests pet owners are happy with the service they receive from vets A CMA survey suggests pet owners are happy with their vets - both corporate and independent - when it comes to quality of service. But, with the exception of Pets at Home, customer satisfaction on cost is much lower for the big companies. "I think that large veterinary corporations, particularly where they're owned by private equity companies, are more concerned about profits than professionals who own veterinary businesses," says Suzy Hudson-Cooke from the British Veterinary Union, which is part of Unite. Proposals for change The CMA's final report on the vet industry is expected by the spring but no date has been set for publication. In its provisional report, it proposed improved transparency on pricing and vet ownership. Companies would have to reveal if vet practices were part of a chain, and whether they had business connections with hospitals, out-of-hours surgeries, online pharmacies and even crematoria. IVC, CVS and Vet Partners all have connected businesses and would have to be more transparent about their services in the future. Pets at Home does not buy practices - it works in partnership with individual vets, as does Medivet. These companies have consistently made clear in their branding who owns their practices. The big companies say they support moves to make the industry more transparent so long as they don't put too high a burden on vets. David Reader says the CMA proposals could have gone further. "There's good reason to think that once this investigation is concluded, some of the larger veterinary groups will continue with their acquisition strategies." The CMA says its proposals would "improve competition by helping pet owners choose the right vet, the right treatment, and the right way to buy medicine - without confusion or unnecessary cost". For Rob Jones, however, it is probably too late. "I honestly wouldn't get another pet," he says. "I think it's so expensive now and the risk financially is so great.             Food Terms of Use About the BBC Privacy Policy Cookies Accessibility Help Parental Guidance Contact the BBC Make an editorial complaint BBC emails for you Copyright © 2026 BBC. The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read about our approach to external linking.
    • What does the area with the blue dotted lines and the crossed out water drop mean? No water in this area? So many leaks in the area.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...