Health Board funding
A new, new, funding formula for Health Boards has been announced by Nicola Sturgeon.
It is to be phased in over a number of years to ensure that no Health Board suffers cuts in any year. That statement is, of course, fallacious as what is being proposed is that inflation based increases will not be awarded until such time as the new reduced level of expenditure is reached. That is to say, the Health Boards will face an annual cut in budget equal to inflation.
Consequently, those Boards who should benefit will receive only slow increases.
Such a classic stabilising mechanism is necessary to avoid large shocks, but by its nature adversely affects the 'winners'. But let us be grateful for it's existence.
The WIHB Acute and Community Health Budget is due to fall by 18% - which equates to about 5 or 6 years of no growth for inflation/cuts of 2.5-3% each year.
The culprit - and no I don't mean the NHS Scotland Resource Allocation Committee - is the new formula which "takes account of changing population, life expectancy, deprivation and remoteness of rural communities."
We know which ones we gain on, and on which we lose - so it would appear that the dropping population is resulting in more cuts in services (such as the secondary schools), leading to less viable communities and a vicious circle of decline.
It is to be phased in over a number of years to ensure that no Health Board suffers cuts in any year. That statement is, of course, fallacious as what is being proposed is that inflation based increases will not be awarded until such time as the new reduced level of expenditure is reached. That is to say, the Health Boards will face an annual cut in budget equal to inflation.
Consequently, those Boards who should benefit will receive only slow increases.
Such a classic stabilising mechanism is necessary to avoid large shocks, but by its nature adversely affects the 'winners'. But let us be grateful for it's existence.
The WIHB Acute and Community Health Budget is due to fall by 18% - which equates to about 5 or 6 years of no growth for inflation/cuts of 2.5-3% each year.
The culprit - and no I don't mean the NHS Scotland Resource Allocation Committee - is the new formula which "takes account of changing population, life expectancy, deprivation and remoteness of rural communities."
We know which ones we gain on, and on which we lose - so it would appear that the dropping population is resulting in more cuts in services (such as the secondary schools), leading to less viable communities and a vicious circle of decline.
13 comments:
It would appear that falling population leads to less govt funding which leads to a fall in the population which leads to less govt funding which.....
And what about those 2 year secondaries? Some councillors turn up at your public meeting and promise their support, they quote former councillors, they quote the chairman of the community council and then they bugger off and avoid further public meetings so that when they sit in the chamber they can vote to close school they had previously declared their support for. Yeah some councillors are lower than a spring tide at the equinox!!!
so which councillors have been saying one thing and doing another ..
and which councillors wanted 16 turbines instead of the 13 recommended by their planning committee???
Probably your old mate Maroot who was saying one thing publicly about schools and lobbying behind the scenes for another.
He tried to get the Council to support a scheme for windfarms that wasn't even proposed by the LWP.
It is difficult to face both ways when you head is up your scantimonious bottom.
Maroot put the "J" in Janus.
having observed the council meeting i can assure that maroot not only voted to keep the schools open but also spoke in favour of such. When the minute of the meeting is available you will see that of the seven councillors representing the wards in which there were schools affected only one found it possible to shaft his electorate.
man of many.... wasn't Janus two faced? I am sure that would have made it more difficult to.... oh, I see your point!
I'm not sure what slight maroot has perpitrated on you, 'many of many mansions'. Perhaps you could elaborate.
What I do know is that maroot, along with angus maccormack, spent many years working in education, so they probably know a thing or two about what is best for our youngsters.
spent many years working in education, so they probably know a thing or two about what is best for our youngsters.
So did Ian Huntley.
so years of work in the field of education would qualify a councillor to make a decision on what is the best form of education for todays youth?
I did notice from the public gallery that maroot and mccormick were on opposite sides of the vote.
Anon 8:54PM,
You might think your comment is clever, ironic, or even funny, but I'm sure many - especially the parents of Holly Wells and Jessica Chapman - would find it extremely offensive.
Away and take a look at yourself.
12:31 AM
Lighten up - life is too short mate
Sometimes the only way us incomers can cope with you "indigenous folk" is to have a smile and a laugh. Something I believe is banned here all the time, not just on the Sabbath.
Anon 9.20am
Feel free to leave then - on any ferry between Monday & Saturday
man of one public gallery,
I think you missed the point I was making.
Whilst I don't expect councillors maccormack and macleod to agree on all matters education, I was just saying that their years spent teaching probably put them in a better position to make informed decisions about education policy than the average person.
Apologies for any misunderstanding.
Post a Comment