I am of course querying the decision to extend free HIV treatment on the NHS to foreigners, a decision announced just two days after we are informed by George Osborne that the UK has run out of money. Ed West, on his blog, makes the valid point that offering this treatment may well encourage people suffering from this illness to come to this country. That this move will probably prove a magnet for yet more immigration at a time when the government is desperately attempting to reduce immigration would appear to have escaped the minds of our political elite. I have to question the logic - and the fairness - of the government asking the NHS to make cuts, cuts which will have a detrimental effect on those who have, in effect, 'paid into' the NHS, whilst providing free treatment to foreigners who will have made no such 'investment'.
The comment by Anne Milton, the public health minister, that tough guidance meant that this measure would not be abused is completely laughable. I seem to recall similar assurances being provided on just about every policy that our politicians have introduced. When remembering the greatest assurance of all, that of Ted Heath who assured us that membership of the European Union would not involve any loss of sovereignty, just why the hell should we believe anything any politician tells us?
Reverting to Osborne's statement that the UK has run out of money, perhaps this would not be the case if we had not provided funds to prop up the euro, perhaps this would not be the case if we had refrained from trying to teach Libya a lesson, perhaps this would not be the case had we refrained from such vanity projects as HS2, perhaps this would not be the case were we not forced to spend £5million per annum keeping Abu Qatada in our country.
The Telegraph article informs us that those from abroad, including failed asylum seekers, students and tourists are currently barred from receiving free HIV treatment - yet this does not appear to be the case, at least not according to Nam. It is also important to ask our political elite just when did they ask those who will be providing the necessary funds whether they agreed that their money could be used for this?
Now, if we had 'referism'...........
Change of URL
13 years ago
6 comments:
They have cut £1 billion from Care for the Elderly so they have it burning a hole in their pockets and wanted to favour a PC group in place of Dying Wrinklies
Precisely WfW! I think we've both discussed on previous occaisions the golden tit that is our welfare state and how it shines like a beacon across the world. I think we've probably both mentioned that we might solve our unfettered immigration issue if we were in fact to turn its glow off
Going by experience they will, while being treated, be shagging their way around the locals. And so ensuring the amount of sufferers increases.
"Be shagging their way around the locals."
And, no doubt, if one of said locals becomes infected and names the carrier, we will also end up footing the bill for whatever prison term is subsequently handed down...
For the life of me I cannot understand why we don't just build hospitals all over the world. We could then provide free healthcare for everyone. This crowd of Quislings ought to be hanged, drawn and quartered, then fed to the dogs. How we are not taking to the streets with piano wire in hand amazes me.
Drugs costing £10,000 pa
Post a Comment