NHS Privatisation

The video relates to the English NHS but it's important here in Scotland we keep ourselves informed of what is happening in other parts of the UK.

A similar plan could apply to Scottish Water and the Forestry Commission if certain political parties get their way.

Thanks to Dr Grumble.

Tweet

Scotland's Methadone Prescribing - Worst in Europe

I've never been an illegal drug user, not even to experiment, but I do take drugs. My drug of choice is legal, I have to pay for it and because it's expensive that does control my intake. My drug is nicotine. I'm not in the least proud that I use this drug and I struggle endlessly to finish the habit. One reason I started blogging was to take my mind off the 'need' for a cigarette.

The NHS in Scotland has a methadone problem which is spiralling out of control. We know vast sums of money is ploughed into this problem, we know there are programmes which have proved successful, but still there is no improvement. The Sunday Post has discovered at least twice as many methadone users, per head of the population, in Scotland than in any other European country.

Hundreds of addicts have been on methadone for more than a decade even though experts advise a maximum of two years.

Almost 10,000 state funded methadone prescriptions, costing taxpayers £320,000, are issued by chemists every single week.

The number of people dependent on the highly addictive drug has soared by a third in 5 years.

The probe also revealed that a third of those prescribed methadone are continuing their heroin habit, increasing their risk of overdose.

I've never understood why a highly addictive drug is used to wean users off heroin. That's rather like me changing to menthol cigarettes thinking I'll be able to stop smoking altogether within a short time. I know that's just nonsense and I would, more likely than not, become addicted to the menthol cigarettes.

David Liddell, director of the Scottish Drugs Forum said "Methadone has helped people escape street crime and stabilise their lives and also played a part in reducing HIV in the 1980."

I'm quite sure he is correct, but surely he recognises those who receive methadone and continue to have a heroin habit, have to find the money somehow. There doesn't seem much point in suggesting users are charged for methadone because many will not have the money. Doctors who prescribe long term methadone start to feed a habit rather than starve it, but GPs say there are no support services available, so they continue to supply their patients. This is all part of a horrible vicious circle which is exceedingly hard to break.

Perhaps the prescribing of methadone should be taken out of individual GPs' hands and centralised. Its distribution would then be much more tightly controlled and addicts may ask for help more quickly rather than languishing in the chemical world of methadone.

The tried and tested programmes are expensive but, in the long term, it would be worth while spending money on these rather than endless doses of methadone. Leaving addicts on this drug is creating a larger drug addictive class in society and the longer we allow it to survive and thrive, the harder it will be to resolve.

Just look at how today's 'benefit culture' developed for proof, if proof is needed.

Tweet

Gordon Brown is Considering Ditching Nuclear Weapons

Gordon Brown is considering ditching the new Trident nuclear deterrent to save money according to the Scottish edition of the Daily Mail. As ministers search for cuts in public services to plug soaring debts, the £20 billion replacements for the current nuclear arsenal could be scaled back, or the existing warheads made to last much longer.

The plans, which are being discussed by Cabinet ministers, emerged as the chancellor was accused of a cynical manoevre to hoodwink the public about how much money Labour will have to slash from front line services.

Ed Balls admitted yesterday that tough choices would be necessary and said, "I think if we are deft and we can get the economy right we can keep investing in schools, hospitals and our police at the front line." But in private ministers acknowledge that severe cuts will be necessary. 'Big Ticket' defence projects will be first in line.

Now MoD officials are actively considering a cheaper nuclear arsenal, which could see the UK reliant on missiles based in Britain or arming aircraft with nuclear bombs instead. Another proposal would see the lifespan of the current missiles extended to 2060.

An MoD source said, "All spending will be reviewed next year and that includes Trident." May I remind them to include safe equipment for the military. It is a disgrace that soldiers are being put at serious risk while politicians play games about who can lie the most.

Ah! So another urgent matter is to be delayed until after the general election. Of course it is part of the Comprehensive Spending Review which Alistair Darling kicked into the long grass last week. This Westminster government has no shame.

Tweet

SNP GOVERNMENT DROPS PLANS TO LEASE SCOTLAND'S FORESTS

The Herald is reporting the SNP have dropped their plans to offer the private sector long term leases on 25% of Scotland's forests.

Environmental Minister Roseanna Cunningham today wrote to members of Holyrood's Rurual Affairs Committee to state that the leasing proposal has been ruled out by ministers.  The leasing plan was part of the climate change Bill.

I've previously posted on this subject and most of the commenters were against the idea and some couldn't understand why, when we have a public body such as the Forestry Commission into which £x million is ploughed annually, the Forestry Commission cannot reorganise and undertake the work the private sector were willing to do.  If we don't have staff qualified to manage these advances then let's shake up the FC and employ staff who have the required qualifications and abilities. The government's public consultation showed similar concerns.

A sensible decision from Roseanna Cunningham and one which will be applauded all over Scotland.

Tweet

THE BACK DOOR PRIVATISATION OF SCOTLAND'S FORESTS

The Scotsman contained an article yesterday about the long-term leasing of 25% of Scotland's forests and the fact that 71% of people, who responded to a Scottish government consultation, were against it.  About 12% supported the government's proposals and the rest were undecided or neutral (from a total of 399 replies).

The document also highlighted the Forestry Commission Scotland's union had collected about 3,700 signatures against and the Lib Dems say they have gathered a 12,000 name petition also against the proposals.

Mike Russell states on the FC website, " To reach our vision of 25% of Scotland being covered in woodland we need to create 50,000 hectares of new woodland, roughly 25 times the size of Edinburgh.  We need a new way of doing this and it will cost more money.

More woodland can help tackle greenhouse gas emissions and importantly supports local businesses and farm diversification.  If we can raise new funds from leasing our forests then it will kick start a massive expansion in woodland creation and conservation benefits so it's a win win situation".

Good spin Mike but it's certainly not a win win situation, it's a win lose one and Scotland would be the loser.  Here in Tayside forest covers around 13% of the land, 35% is publicly owned and 65% privately owned.  With this proposal it could well result in Tayside forests being privately owned give or take 5% in 99 years time and plenty long enough for leased forests to be accepted as the norm.

In my naivity surely the Scottish government could find the money to introduce the 'new way of doing this' and not rent off our land to private businesses, who we can be assured, will make large profits.

Within the Forest Commission there is a great deal of expertise and skill.  Why can't these people be used to introduce more new methods and more people encouraged towards a career in forestry?  After all, Scotland's landowners, foresters and universities played an important part in the introduction and dissemination of scientific forestry in Britain.  

We own little enough of our country and this proposal bodes badly for Scotland. It is privatisation by the back door and no amount of spin will convince me otherwise. The Scottish government need to drop this idea now, before it damages their credibility.  

As for Sarah Boyack saying in the Scotsman that the lease plan must be dropped, that's a labour U-turn here in Scotland.  Westminster are planning to lease off chunks of English forests so it is labour party policy.  Thankfully forestry is a devolved issue. We have a government which listens to the people and hopefully Roseanna Cunningham, in her new post, will hear the voices of dissent.

Tweet