Speaking of eyewear I would be interested to know Sir Starmer's prescription . My suspicion is that he has reading glasses to manage his presbyopia. I bought some very satisfactory ones for £11.99 (3 pairs). After a year I am still on the first pair. I paid for them myself.
Typical NHS; obfuscation, duplication and spending of money on non-essentials. The more complicated you make the flowcharts the more people give up trying to interpret them and go to the cinema instead. You might like my little book "Mad Medicine" (on Amazon).
It appears to me that of the entire NHS budget, less than 2/3 is used to treat patients directly. This is utterly ridiculous, there are far too many hangers on, and not enough medical staff who face patients. Keep asking questions, and please report the answers to Nigel Farage and Reform directly. There will be some interesting debates and questions in Parliament for us to watch, at least we will get something for all our money! In addition Stalins glasses look virtually clear to me, are they another theatrical prop?
just endless snouts in endless troughs; as folks comment, few doing patient interaction; all resembling Sir Humphrey's hospital where it was running at peak efficiency with no patients ..
Starmer's specs are props to lend him an air of thoughtful intelligence. Its not working.....If anyone is in need of a laugh, look up Intel Lady on YouTube, she does a corking impression of Angela Rayner ("welcome to another no brainer with me, Angela Rayner, proud northerner and basic instinct enthusiast....."), and it's extremely funny. Apparently Oor Keir got 28 pairs of glasses cos they were BOGOFs 🤣😂
DHSC was voted £187 billion by Parliamant in 22/23. This was divided into funds for public bodies that are "under the DHSC umberella":
Non-Ministerial Departments (1), Non-Departmental Public Bodies - executive and advisory (16) and executive agencies (2) (£16 billion) and Local Authorities (£3 billion) TOTAL £19 billion
This leaves about £159 billion for NHS England and £9 billion unaccounted for.
NHS Egland splits its £159 billion between Intrgrated Car Boards (£120 billion) and Direct Commissioning, Public Health (not provided by Local Authorities), Primary Care and NHS England administration. Total: £39 billion
Integrated Care Boards pass £95 billion of their £120 billion to NHS Trusts and other providers. The other £25 billion is unaccounted for. NHS staff budgets were £71 billion in 22/23 that is about 40% of our total Health and Social Care Budget.
So there is £34 billion (almost half the NHS clinical staff budget) lurking unaccounted for in these diagrams.
Well, it sure doesn't go looking at even main stream articles that deal with the possible harmful effects of the mmRNA jabs as far as I can see.
Silly me but I thought that was the job of the MHRA and the independent, lol, JCVI. Then again, the MHRA is funded from the Dep.t of Health and Social Care...
I mean only maybe 25% of the world's population remain unjabbed, so no need to go looking for possible harms which remain for the rest... Just carry on jabbing - especially if you're pregnant. That said, I've complete trust in our genetic engineers who have doubtless tremenous understanding of the cascade of changes to a woman's immune system when pregnant.
Out of context perhaps and for which I aplogise, but courtesy of Dr. Guy Hatchard I came across this paper-
Constipated, bloated bureaucracy. All those boxes with arrows and money pointing in every direction. It is designed such that it is very difficult to follow and track exactly what the hell they do with any of the money. It really burns my ass that some highly paid pompous MBA consultants likely came up with this tiny font diagrammatic drivel. Canada is chock full of all this constipation byproduct as well.
What a load of old cobblers that report is. Word salad galore and obfuscation to the fore. As might be expected loads of mistakes in an unnecessarily lengthy report. In view of the turnover of ministers during the year how many of them would find time to read it.
Here are a few random items noted. How is it an achievement to set up a capital fund of £50 million to support discharge ? Then another of £500 million to speed it up?
44,000 more nurses? What are they doing?
Three achievements are simply printing publications!
The contents list is meaningless it refers to Priority 1 as Page 9 or. Section 9. In fact it is on page 15 item 19.
Accountability Report starts page 173 Section 431
Internal audit (Page 151) gives “moderate”.
assurance on the adequacy of the framework of governance .
On page 162 section 702 states suspension payments “overpaid “to medical practitioners was £1.3 Million (previous year £964 k)
Now I may have misread the odd item but was viewing it all on my phone with old eyes.
Capital DEL in the big grey box looks wrong to me. £3.3Bn of £11.2Bn for Capital expenditure should not be going on running DHSC and System Admin. In my experience, running things, that is resourcing them, comes out of Resource DEL. Unless they mean Capital expenditure just on running DHSC and System
Admin but £3.3Bn is a lot of paper, ink and new computers.
Speaking of eyewear I would be interested to know Sir Starmer's prescription . My suspicion is that he has reading glasses to manage his presbyopia. I bought some very satisfactory ones for £11.99 (3 pairs). After a year I am still on the first pair. I paid for them myself.
Hi Dr Bamji, Starmer’s are for looks, appearance, front. Writing of which, what do the wiring diagrams and inconstancies in billions suggest to you?
Best wishes, tom
Typical NHS; obfuscation, duplication and spending of money on non-essentials. The more complicated you make the flowcharts the more people give up trying to interpret them and go to the cinema instead. You might like my little book "Mad Medicine" (on Amazon).
It appears to me that of the entire NHS budget, less than 2/3 is used to treat patients directly. This is utterly ridiculous, there are far too many hangers on, and not enough medical staff who face patients. Keep asking questions, and please report the answers to Nigel Farage and Reform directly. There will be some interesting debates and questions in Parliament for us to watch, at least we will get something for all our money! In addition Stalins glasses look virtually clear to me, are they another theatrical prop?
I see that Richard Tice is already watching! Keep up the good work Regards David.
just endless snouts in endless troughs; as folks comment, few doing patient interaction; all resembling Sir Humphrey's hospital where it was running at peak efficiency with no patients ..
Starmer's specs are props to lend him an air of thoughtful intelligence. Its not working.....If anyone is in need of a laugh, look up Intel Lady on YouTube, she does a corking impression of Angela Rayner ("welcome to another no brainer with me, Angela Rayner, proud northerner and basic instinct enthusiast....."), and it's extremely funny. Apparently Oor Keir got 28 pairs of glasses cos they were BOGOFs 🤣😂
Budget 07
DHSC was voted £187 billion by Parliamant in 22/23. This was divided into funds for public bodies that are "under the DHSC umberella":
Non-Ministerial Departments (1), Non-Departmental Public Bodies - executive and advisory (16) and executive agencies (2) (£16 billion) and Local Authorities (£3 billion) TOTAL £19 billion
This leaves about £159 billion for NHS England and £9 billion unaccounted for.
NHS Egland splits its £159 billion between Intrgrated Car Boards (£120 billion) and Direct Commissioning, Public Health (not provided by Local Authorities), Primary Care and NHS England administration. Total: £39 billion
Integrated Care Boards pass £95 billion of their £120 billion to NHS Trusts and other providers. The other £25 billion is unaccounted for. NHS staff budgets were £71 billion in 22/23 that is about 40% of our total Health and Social Care Budget.
So there is £34 billion (almost half the NHS clinical staff budget) lurking unaccounted for in these diagrams.
Well, it sure doesn't go looking at even main stream articles that deal with the possible harmful effects of the mmRNA jabs as far as I can see.
Silly me but I thought that was the job of the MHRA and the independent, lol, JCVI. Then again, the MHRA is funded from the Dep.t of Health and Social Care...
I mean only maybe 25% of the world's population remain unjabbed, so no need to go looking for possible harms which remain for the rest... Just carry on jabbing - especially if you're pregnant. That said, I've complete trust in our genetic engineers who have doubtless tremenous understanding of the cascade of changes to a woman's immune system when pregnant.
Out of context perhaps and for which I aplogise, but courtesy of Dr. Guy Hatchard I came across this paper-
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-024-03278-y#:~:
Maybe explains how and why the jabbed suffer repeat infection.
I've sent it to the MHRA but I'm probably wasting my time because I'm sure they've already appraised it. Just like all the others I've sent.
Constipated, bloated bureaucracy. All those boxes with arrows and money pointing in every direction. It is designed such that it is very difficult to follow and track exactly what the hell they do with any of the money. It really burns my ass that some highly paid pompous MBA consultants likely came up with this tiny font diagrammatic drivel. Canada is chock full of all this constipation byproduct as well.
What a load of old cobblers that report is. Word salad galore and obfuscation to the fore. As might be expected loads of mistakes in an unnecessarily lengthy report. In view of the turnover of ministers during the year how many of them would find time to read it.
Here are a few random items noted. How is it an achievement to set up a capital fund of £50 million to support discharge ? Then another of £500 million to speed it up?
44,000 more nurses? What are they doing?
Three achievements are simply printing publications!
The contents list is meaningless it refers to Priority 1 as Page 9 or. Section 9. In fact it is on page 15 item 19.
Accountability Report starts page 173 Section 431
Internal audit (Page 151) gives “moderate”.
assurance on the adequacy of the framework of governance .
On page 162 section 702 states suspension payments “overpaid “to medical practitioners was £1.3 Million (previous year £964 k)
Now I may have misread the odd item but was viewing it all on my phone with old eyes.
Capital DEL in the big grey box looks wrong to me. £3.3Bn of £11.2Bn for Capital expenditure should not be going on running DHSC and System Admin. In my experience, running things, that is resourcing them, comes out of Resource DEL. Unless they mean Capital expenditure just on running DHSC and System
Admin but £3.3Bn is a lot of paper, ink and new computers.