We started yesterday with warm congraulations to Her Majesty on attaining the sixtieth anniversary of her accession to the throne.
For the second week running at Prime Minister’s Questions, Ed Miliband’s inquiries were on health reform. He had one of his most successful sessions so far, during which we found out that David Cameron doesn’t want Andrew Lansley to be taken out and shot.
Miliband was on excellent form and, by golly by gosh, at one point he almost ascended to the John Smith “hotels fall into the sea” level of stinging wit, with this passage:
Isn’t this interesting? The Prime Minister says that this is all about reform, but even the Tory Reform Group has come out against these proposals. It comes to something when even the Tories do not trust the Tories on the NHS.
It sounded better
than it looks written on the page.
There were hordes of traded statistics. Cameron held his ground well. But I can’t help but think that the government is battening down the hatches and preparing to sail on through flak and storms to get the Health and Social Care Bill, come what may, on goat skin to the Diamond Monarch for her signature.
Liberal Democrat questions
Sir Menzies Campbell asked what confidence we can have that unilateral intervention by Russia will put an end to the terrible violence in Syria. “Very little” – was the PM’s response.
Gordon Birtwistle highlighted the success of the Work programme since it was introduced in Burnley in October 2010. The town has gone from 66% of people economically active to 75% in that time.
Unusual event of the week
Nick Clegg nodded. He only does that once every blue moon these days. On this occasion it was to indicate his support for the sovereign. Safe nodding territory there.
* Paul Walter is a LibDem activist in Newbury, Berkshire and blogs at Liberal Burblings
Follow @LibDemVoice on Twitter
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
The Sun story about Chris Huhne that was a total invention (and which the other papers happily copied)
11 Liberal Democrat MPs vote for registrars to be exempt from marrying same sex couples
How Liberal Democrat MPs voted on same sex marriage amendments
Same sex Marriage: another Liberal Democrat victory
Opinion: Why Lib Dems should support the Referendum on the EU – and let’s have it before 2015
Baroness Sarah Ludford MEP writes…An EU-US trade deal would be good for Europe and for Britain
Opinion: An EU exit would be bad for Britain; it is our job to explain why
Opinion: Some thoughts on the NHS from a recent patient
“Is the coalition government doing enough to encourage social mobility?”
Lib Dem plan for a Greener, Fairer and Stronger Lancashire is Passed
Question Time Liveblog 23/5/13
A day in the life of a Stockport Councillor
New north Kingston secondary school - Goldsmith tries to claim credit for Tories
Just because you murder someone, it doesn't mean your views are worth hearing
We should turn Britain into a tax haven
A chillingly bizarre aspect of yesterday's ranting butcher video
San Francisco in 1951 as seen from a U.S. Navy submarine
bcrombie
Amalric
Eddie Sammon
Michael Parsons
Richard Wingfield
2 Comments
Ed Miliband’s comment about the Tory Reform Group may have sounded better than it looks written above; you could also have written that it sounded too good to be true.
Because the Labour leader was, I’m afraid, fibbing. It was a misrepresentation of a blog article that, while critical of the Health Secretary and the approach taken, was in fact PRO-reform of the NHS – as you can see here:
http://toryreformgroup.tumblr.com/post/17208670653/craig-barrett-for-the-good-of-the-nhs-lansley-must-admit
The TRG blog’s website has a very clear disclaimer on every page saying that independent contributors do not necessarily represent the views of the TRG board, officers or its members.
The actual TRG view of the health reforms is printed here:
http://toryreformgroup.tumblr.com/post/17264095904/nik-darlington-alexander-pannett-trg-response-to-ed-mili
Worth pointing out!
•Nik Darlington….
I love your conclusion that, an article that starts…”For the good of the NHS, Andrew Lansley must admit defeat”, and ends..,.”For the good of the NHS, Andrew Lansley must admit defeat and head to the backbenches”….
is pro reform.
The idea that the paragraph..
.”We ought not consider the NHS purely in financial terms because the benefits to the nation’s health and well-being must outweigh the mere cost. Yet that is not an argument for it to remain unchallenged or unreformed. The NHS must be continually analysed and rationalised to ensure that it is fit for purpose in the modern world”…..is pro reform, for ideological reasons, would be laughable if it wasn’t so serious…
The paragraph is “Mom and Apple pie”. No organisation, be it public or private, could argue that it should, “remain unchallenged or unreformed” because that would mean it was considered perfect.
The article is wholly ‘against’ this NHS reform and that is what matters…