Marmora Man

j5nn Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Wow i'm sold!!!! Thanks everyone for your > responses, it sounds like a great place to live. I > love Brixton but even over the last year I have > noticed that its started to get more and more > trendy-Brixton village used to be a well kept > secret but sadly that is no longer the case! > Peckham Rye sounds like it still has that vibe to > it...exciting! Of course you've gotta keep up - can't be trendy in an areas that everyone knows is trendy??!

Generally speaking individuals don't choose which A&E to use - unless they are "walking wounded" in which case there are, generally, not urgent. If transported by a blue light ambulance (ie an urgent life threatening case) the LAS and LAS despatchers will ensure the patient goes to the most appropriate A&E that has sufficient capacity and expertise to treat the patient in good time. Choice seldom comes into it. Equally - patients are only admitted for an overnight stay if it's clinically necessary - the individual hospital or geographic location won't change the probability of any patient requiring an admission. This thread seems to be generating a high degree of angst - the report makes clear that there will no overall diminution of NHS services to South London as a whole - but that by rationalising and relocating services the services will cost less and therefore provide better value. Inevitably there will be some that will be adversely affected by the changes - but the duty of NHS planners is to ensure an equitable service for the total population rather than a personalised service to individuals. Of course, once admitted to hospital or placed under the care of a clinician THEN the service must be personalised.

Katrusja, Rather than being a negative post, your note appears an excellent and clearly thought through summary of issues to be considered - most of which those in favour of the extension seem to have ignored. I occasionally use HOP station and occasionally walk there and back. Initially the idea of extending the 63 was attractive but I can see that to save me some. probably useful, exercise many people would have to be inconvenienced.

j5nn Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Thanks guys, > > What would you say makes it different to Brixton? Grass (of the green kind you play football on)

Medley Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Nothing wrong with a bit of emotion when such > crazy decisions are threatened. > > Actually I think if you read through the responses > from clinicians and medical staff on the SLH > website, you'll find lots of reason. > > What the SLH perhaps lacks is a fully worked-up > alternative plan. That's the moan of Kershaw the > administrator - apparently - that no one came up > with a workable alternative. > > This line of argument, for me, conveniently > ignores the fact that this is precisely his/the > Trust's/DH's/the NHS' job. It's not for local > people to resist insane and unjust slashings of > services and abandon their day jobs to work out > what would be a better plan. What are all these > managers paid for? Medley - you seem confused! You have pre-judged the decision as "crazy", insist that "It's not for local people to resist insane and unjust slashings of services and abandon their day jobs to work out what would be a better plan", describe Matthew Kershaw as an administrator but then ask "What are all these managers paid for?" implying that they are not doing their job. All "those" managers have been paid for producing the report you apparently deplore - despite apparently not taking the time, or even considering your responsibility, to read.

Peckhamnearbe Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > People reading this who are interested in the > campaign to try to save Lewisham Hospital may be > interested in this: > > From: r. > BBC Question Time protest Goldsmiths College-Save > Lewisham Hospital > This Thursday January 10th 5.30pm-9.30pm > more info: > http://www.savelewishamhospital.com/bbc-question-t > ime-protest/ > Also > http://brockleycentral.blogspot.co.uk/2013/01/clos > e-lewisham-plan-sent-to-health.html Focusing on one hospital (Lewisham) ignores the real problem that is how to ensure that the provision of care across South London is balanced, cost effective and efficient. The "Save Lewisham hospital" campaign in misjudged and based more on emotion that reason.

buggie Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > MM: If Devon & Cornwall had similar > deprivation/transient immigrant population let > alone similar population then fair comparison, but > I don't think it's comparable in any way. > > I could've said similar of Suffolk where I grew > up, but again the population is incomparable to > round here. It seems you misread me - I wasn't referring to quantity or range of services but the distance necessary to travel. We do not need so many NHS hospitals all trying to deliver the same services within the same few square miles. Rationalisation and specialisation DOES make sense - but too many media commentators prefer to lead on emotion (finding someone to say "my son / daughter / wife / mother would have died if the local A&E had been closed) rather than lead and inform the debate.

I haven't looked at it in extensive detail but it can be argued that South London is over provided with A&E units and, frankly, with hospitals. I believe the review has taken the opportunity to rationalise services across the area and the three hospitals concerned to create a more logical geographical spread. Undoubtedly, the fact that two of the three units have associated PFI debt to be serviced makes it more likely that they will survive as reducing their service offering has limited impact on contracted running costs - whereas in a non PFI unit closing services and selling off redundant property is an option - realising real capital and real P&L savings. I spent much of my life in the West Country (Cornwall and Devon) in those two counties there are just 4 major hospitals (Truro, Barnstaple, Exeter & Plymouth) all approximately 45 - 50 miles apart. Here in East Dulwich we can walk to as many hospitals within 45 minutes. Yet the mortality and other key clinical indicators are no worse for the Devon and Cornish people - despite what can often be a long journey to hospital. A hospital on every doorstep in neither necessary nor a "more safe" no matter what local protesters may say.

I find the level of comment on the Guardian website to be usually just above 6th form politics debating society standard and often falling far short of that. Therefore I'll not bother. However, Kings College is a well run NHS Trust - its Board appears to communicate well with all levels of staff, it manages its financial and other resources effectively and is a part of the wider Kings Health Partnership where it has teamed up with St Thomas' & Guy's Trust (and will almost certainly amalgamate formally with this Trust - plans are well advanced). This enables it to generate efficiencies of scale in purchasing, resource utilisation and, more importantly, the location of clinical services in the immediate South London area of Southwark & Lambeth - so there will be / is one large and effective, well equipped cardiac surgery centre - ditto for strokes, neurosurgery and so on, rather than a multiplicity of less well equipped and staffed units trying to deliver more than they are capable of. The KHP is also, with St Thomas' & Guy's an Academic Health Science Centre - one of just five in UK and on a par with the internationally renowned Johns Hopkins University Hospital in the USA. There are undoubtedly problems at Kings - nothing is perfect but it has demonstrated over time that it can manage effectively in the political, economic and clinical maelstrom that is the NHS today. Therefore partnering the South London Trusts with Kings should lead to a sharing of knowledge, skills and ability - creating a more effective NHS service to the area covered by the South London Trusts. The only danger is that the Kings management team could lose focus on their own hospitals and services - but this is unlikely. I therefore support the broad direction that the Matthew Kershaw has recommended. Having quickly reviewed the Guardian commentary - I find the level of knowledge and quality of debate to be even poorer that I expected it to be.

If it tastes good - I'll eat it. In my experience flesh, fowl and veg reared by a caring farmer and slaughtered appropriately will taste better. Game and line caught fish equally benefit by not being "farmed".

aquarius moon Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > So room 101 is kind of like the Celebrity Big > Brother basement? > > Even more reason to send Loz & Marmora Man there. > > They will get to eat lettuce leaves! I refer, m'lud, to my earlier reference in another thread regarding erudition and vegetarians.

Babajack - not a folk or celighd band but good at on this website - http://babajack.com/ They were great at a recent wedding.

Zealots

the-e-dealer Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Great another Hairdresser! Still no telephone > sanitisers though! But you're making a good stab at auditioning for Marvin the Paranoid Android!!? And at least it's not a shoe shop!

Huguenot Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- Did you know that the entire global supply of Worcestershire Sauce is made by 40 people? I din't but I know one of the team that makes Worcestershire Sauce, he taught my sons cricket, so I'm acquainted with 2.5% of its entire workforce.

PD Said `"Doubtless you will claim that my comments are neither coherent or valid, as you're always right, at least that's what you'd have us all believe. Over to you". I have never claimed an absolute certainty about anything - far less that I'm always right. I do however, prefer to enjoy perfectly legal pursuits & pleasures without insult while abhorring the tendency, of some, to believe that freedom of choice must be curtailed to suit the whims and beliefs of others to whom I do no harm. Anyway it's my turn to set off for a short break on the snow - so cheerio for a few days.

LadyDeliah Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Loz, don't you think it's kind of mean to tease > someone like that though? A couple of times is > maybe just a bit of a laugh, but it's clear you > are a much stronger person so sustained teasing is > surely bullying. > > Sorry if you feel I'm being a busy body, but I'm > just feeling uncomfortable reading your posts now > and I usually like your arguments, even when I > don't agree with them. Lady D - There is a distinction between teasing or disparaging poor logic & argument and bullying. Loz and I were both certainly teasing Parkdrive and Aquarius Moon for their inability to distinguish between opinion, ?moral right? and debate ? both appeared to believe that opinion, assertion and insults constituted an argument. I don?t think it?s about stronger personalities ? it?s about being able to present a valid and coherent argument. This forum is used to robust debate and any protagonist must be prepared to put up or shut up. PD & AM instead resorted to personal insult and ?sulking? when Loz and I stated (repeatedly) we were happy to eat Foie Gras and that the relative levels of alleged cruelty did not concern us. Viz: PD: ?Lets hope any of you that enjoy this odious product never have a funnel shoved down your neck and are force feed? PD: ?You should have hired the services of a mariachi band to serenade you while gorging your odious delight? PD: ?MM demonstrating his ignorance by assuming that anyone that puts forward a view contrary his, MUST be a vegetarian? PD: ?saying that he enjoys FG as if it something to be paraded like a badge or a trophy, and to take some sick pride in announcing it to the world is vile and venomous, same as yourself? AM: ?Don't worry Parkdrive, I'm used to my comments falling on deaf ears. It's been happening for nearly 3 years. But I won't give up? AM: ?Your post proves how truly ignorant you are? AM: If you fighting a losing battle - ?I know how you feel. It's a new year soon, so hang on in there. Somebody may listen one day... And if not... It's their loss?

Huguenot Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Hmmm, strictly speaking there weren't any years > between 1AD and 525AD, and only a few doughty > enthusiasts experienced 526AD to around 800AD. Yeah but - in terms of calendar and number logic ...........

KidKruger Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > AM, the century began on 01/01/2000. > Hence all the end-of-millenium parties the night > before. AM and I seldom agree - but he is right, despite the many millions of people transfixed by a change of number on 31 Dece 1999. There wasn't a "Year Zero" so the end of AD 1 was 31 December 0001 and the second millenium came to an end at the end of the 2,000th year - ie 31 December 2000. Therefore the 3rd millenium and new century began on 1 January 2001.

Don't ask me - ask the council, using FOI if it's that critical. A campaign on EDF is unlikely to change things. Otherwise the annual report will provide details idc. I can't believe the council is as financially illiterate as you appear to assume.

RT - since comercial property is unlikely to depreciate the council has an asset worth ?170m and is making annual savings and has identifid that it can let further space to generate additional receipts. All in all - it's probaly a good deal. If it's not the Audit Commission will have words to say.

ask Delia - she has a whole chapter on eggs

Is Scoop moving there?

pablogrande Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I think penultimate would do what you need and the > great thing is its link to evernote Just checked this out and it certainly looks good.

thanks - researching your suggestions now.