Meeting 15 July for new supporters after successful start to campaign to stop Streeting’s war on the NHS
Constituents in Keir Starmer’s seat in London’s Holborn and St Pancras are so disgusted with the ‘slash and burn’ plan of Starmer’s health hatchet man Wes Streeting that they have launched a campaign to stop it and are inviting others to join them, starting with a meeting next week in the constituency. Both Streeting and his boss, along with most of Starmer’s front bench, have taken huge donations from health-privatiser interests.
A note from the Holborn and St Pancras 4 the NHS (HSP4NHS) group explains:
Angry with the state of the NHS? So are we.
We’re not waiting for politicians to fix it — we’re hitting the streets of Camden, and people are literally running after us to sign our open letter to Keir Starmer.
HSP4NHS is all about cutting through the spin, knocking on doors, and having real conversations. It’s bold, it’s direct — and it’s working.
Come have a go at canvassing (or just shadow if you’re curious). No scripts, no BS — just people power.
The residents are getting engaged!
People are becoming energised!Meet up at Old Diorama arts centre
Regents Place
201 Drummond St
NW1 3FE
5.30pm on Tuesday 15thShort chat with us then off to shadow experienced canvassers or go it alone!
Canvassing starts at 6.30Stop at 8pm and head back to the Old Diorama arts centre where we will have a room, food and drink
If you want to volunteer in general: volunteer@hsp4nhs.org
The campaign is supported by, among others, leading NHS campaigner Dr Bob Gill and former ANC MP Andrew Feinstein, who gave Starmer a fright when he stood against him in the general election a year ago.
Streeting and his privatiser henchmen have outlined a ’10-year plan’ to ration treatment, close hospitals, increase privatisation and replace trained doctors and nurses with ‘associates’ wearing white coats.
Please remember to support Skwawkbox if you can, to help ensure it can keep running. The site is provided free of charge but depends on the support of its readers to be viable. If you’d like to help it keep revealing the news as it is and not what the Establishment wants you to hear – and can afford to without hardship – please click here to arrange a one-off or modest monthly donation via PayPal or here to set up a monthly donation via GoCardless (Skwawkbox will contact you to confirm the GoCardless amount as it has to be entered by us). Alternatively, if you prefer to make a one-off or recurring donation by simple card payment, please use the form below:
Make a one-time donation
Make a monthly donation
Make a yearly donation
Choose an amount
Or enter a custom amount
Your contribution is appreciated.
Your contribution is appreciated.
Your contribution is appreciated.
DonateDonate monthlyDonate yearly
We’ve seen Labour’s 10 year plan, does the HSP4NHS have a credible plan to save the NHS.
Is it to be inferred from this 3.21 pm post, Billy, that you consider the Starmer regime ten-year plan to be:
a) THE (as in definitive article) credible plan to save the NHS?
or
b) A plan requiring a counter plan to save the NHS?
If a) then logically your question becomes redundant – mere rhetoric for the sake of making meaningless noise, which seems to be a speciality of yours.
If b) The question is directed towards the wrong actors as;
(i) Only political parties are able to enact such plans.
(ii) Groups/organisations/initiatives such as HSP4NHS have nowhere near the financial resources clout to compete with the lobbyists of global corporations such as Palintir et al and the banking cartels who control the toy dogs like Herr Starmer that you yap for.
Consequently;
(iii) There currently exists no mechanism within the broken zero efficacy political, economic and social system of the UK to put in place any alternative plan to that of the TINA dictated by the bought and paid for politicians of the UK/Western oligarchy/1%.
If you are really interested in a properly functioning, credible alternative paradigm, it would involve totally reversing privatisation and the State taking back control of the economy from the parasitic privateer rentier class for the benefit of the 99%. A start of which has already been made on the other side of the planet.
If it’s nuts and bolts details, rather than a broad outline, that you are after, the go-to place would be Professor Michael Hudson’s prodigious output;
https://www.waterstones.com/author/michael-hudson/78620
Dave – A simple ‘NO’ would have sufficed. 🤔
Given that you have failed to provide the clarification necessary to enable the question to be answered, Billy, your response is not only premature, it is logically nonsensical (again).
Now, when you have provided the clarification being sought, it will be possible to provide an answer to your question.
Which is it, Billy? A simple a)? or b)? would suffice.
Dave – ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
A simple “I’m taking my bat and ball home” would have been more honest, Billy.
Dave – ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
SNAP!
That’s one game to me.
Dave – …….and I’m supposed to care because?
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Perhaps he’s just a bit thick, Dave.
timfrom – Oh dear, if only we were all as clever as you think you are. 🙄
Perhaps?
After all this time you’re still not sure, tim?
@wee gobshite…
You still working part time?
(And you know where this is leading, dontcha? Oh yes….I’m not far away now).
Make your mind up, Billy.
You are the one claiming you want an answer to your original question. All I was seeking was clarification so as to help you out.
Even Trump is more consistent.
Dave – It’s a simple and straightforward question that doesn’t require any clarification.
I disagree, Billy.
You don’t get to dictate the terms of a two-way conversation. to suit your convenience.
If you want the question answering, you are going to have to provide the clarification requested.
Deal with it.
Dave – I can’t think of one good reason why I should indulge you with your silly vendetta. As most will have have already drawn their own conclusion about your silly distractions and your professed inability to provide a simple answer.
Who cares whether you answer or not?
The responses so far do not support your position, Billy. Which should tell anyone with even the smallest level of self-awareness that they have already lost the audience.
Attempting to deflect a reasonable request for clarification to enable the question to be answered as some kind of vendetta is evidence of either desperation to avoid answering or severe paranoia.
However, seeing as I like you today (because I might not like you tomorrow) I’ll help you out.
Maybe it would assist your position if you reframed the question to the more straightforward and to the point query as to “what is the workable practical alternative to the zero efficacy rip-off of further parasitic privatisation by a carpetbagging minority of privateers which is represented by the so-called plan of what passes for the Labour Party these days?”
Framing the question in this more realistic manner should help even the most wilfully obtuse, such as yourself, to see that the answer to the reframed question has already been provided in my first response of 4:18 pm of 11/07/2025.
It just requires a little cognitive effort and research on your part to follow the link provided.
50 years ago, we had LOCAL tax offices, LOCAL education offices, children were expected (and catered for) to attend their LOCAL school, we had LOCAL hospitals, LOCAL driving test centres, LOCAL police stations, LOCAL council offices, LOCAL housing offices, LOCAL railway stations, LOCAL banks, LOCAL manufacturing, LOCAL builders, LOCAL milk delivery.
Then the rich decided they could save their tax money by centralising everything, often to London or other large cities.
So all that “saved money” that was going to make everyone rich has gone …. where?
winteringham – Have you read Labour’s 10 year plan to save the NHS?
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/10-year-health-plan-for-england-fit-for-the-future
This will be the ten-year-plan that means PFI (again, a real Labour favourite) where you guarantee American Private Equity Fund/a bank/a construction company, like those building (or not building) HS2. And they do the job so poorly that when the time comes to hand over the building it has been so badly built that it needs rebuilding AGAIN! The Blair (spit!) tribute band strikes up again. But I suppose when planning and building regs are removed, ALL buildings will be this shoddy.
winteringham – I’ll take that as a ‘NO’ then. 😞
wintringham,
Before diving in to Billy’s recommendation, I’d avail yourself of the advice and guidance contained in this piece:
https://sonar21.com/the-war-on-truth-how-our-leaders-lie-while-pretending-not-to/
Which will assist in critically assessing the output of any set of plans proposed by the bought and paid for stooges of global corporations like Palinter.
Dave – 🥱
Now that’s ‘impressive’, Billy.
You read a 2,663 word piece, evaluated it’s content and argument in context and posted a ‘response’ of sorts all in the space of 300 seconds.
You did read it didn’t you, Billy?
Or are you once again going off half cocked and shooting from the hip.
You’d best be getting a metaphorical dressing for that metaphorical wound in that foot you’ve just publicly shot yourself in:
Dave – 🥱 ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
DOUBLE SNAP!
That’s two games to me.
Dave – Oh whoopee for you. 🙄
Sour grapes from you, Billy!
In the words of Captain Renaut, “I’m shocked!”
Dave – Awww diddums, I do hope you’re OK. 😘
Fortunately, Billy, like Captain Renaut, those of us who feel sorry for you by attempting to engage with you in grown up discourse have our winnings to fall back on from not emulating your petulant toddler act.
You really have excelled yourself this evening, wee gobshite.
Its all there.
Imagine you – up against any other regular poster on here, on, say, kuenssberg on Sunday morning… doesn’t have to be that show, but it’s an example. (of toerag-cum-right wing centrist bolliox wer’re subject to) .
Even she’d kick you squarely in the cojones region (extelremely doubtful you have any).
…Twice.
If you can’t back yerself up when put on the spot. (Which is always)
Then dont post at all.
I apmost shudder when i imagine what people browsing this thread (on the off-chance) must think after reading your contributions
Oh, and before you give us your prize l-evading comeback – if they don’t like my vernacular they can fuck RIGHT off.
Toffee – At the head of these comments I posed a simple and straightforward question
“We’ve seen Labour’s 10 year plan, does the HSP4NHS have a credible plan to save the NHS.”
You and your fellow Muppets obvious inability to answer this question is not my problem. 😞
What ‘spot’ would that be? I’m puzzled what is it that, I according to you, “can’t back yerself up when put on the spot. (Which is always) “? 🤔
And, Billy, when you have provided the clarification which has now been reasonably requested several times now, rather than flounce off in a hissy fit, the question will be answered.
Now, are we going to receive a grown up response from you or are you going to continue sulking in the corner like a mardy five-year-old?
Dave – It’s a very simple and straightforward question that doesn’t require any clarification. It is disingenuous of you to pretend otherwise.
Right.
Firstly, you recognise your call sign – wee gobshite.
That’s established (as if it wasn’t before….think of the newbies)
OK…
As to the previous post I made. It’s really not hard to decipher. Wanna clue? (Honestly,?)
🥱 ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Gonna play ball and deny you posted that?
Or you gonna concede that just about everyone – including leeanderthal – has you on a choke chain, you political and social/universal gimp?
Toffee – You still haven’t said what this spot is that you’ve supposedly put me on. 🤔
The glorious 10 year plan..
Ok..
Tell us gobshite – how does it compare to the glorious green paper>/i> * and now me phones outta charge….so see you around 4am
Toffee – “The glorious 10 year plan”
Yes, like you, I thought it was quite good.
Why does a question incorrectly focused on a group no one here has heard of until this article appeared and who no one has any contact with not require clarification, Billy?
How is your originally poorly framed question to be answered when no one here knows one way or the other what work and research this group has or has not conducted in this direction?
It is self-evident to any honest actor that clarification is required.
Fortunately, I have helped you out by reframing the question for you;
https://skwawkbox.org/2025/07/11/nhs-campaigners-launch-new-campaign-in-starmers-backyard/#comment-269811
Now off you go and do some homework. If you are too strapped for cash or too tight, I’m quite prepared to lend you a selection of the relevant works if you provide the forwarding address.
Whats glorious about it, beaut?
Toffee – It was your choice of words, not mine.
Those who actually know their arse from a hole in the ground – actual professionals who work in and study the system have a different view from uninformed ignorant shills such as yourself, Billy.
Here’s the SOS NHS Coalition;
https://keepournhspublic.com/nhs-ten-year-health-plan-risks-long-term-damage-not-recovery-but-managed-decline-say-campaigners/
“Despite a reported funding shortfall estimated by the British Medical Association at £423 billion since 2009/10, the plan leans heavily on three assumptions: that community care, prevention, and digital technology can solve the crisis without any significant new investment…..
……The plan highlights a growing reliance on the private sector to deliver elective care – a model that reduces NHS capacity while leaving complex, costly cases to already overstretched NHS teams. Staffing shortages, already crippling the system, will deepen further. Professor Allyson Pollock’s recently published research shows that outsourcing elective care worsens health inequalities yet this plan doubles down on failed models…..
……t postpones any meaningful shift of resources into primary or community care until the end of the plan period (c.2035), and fails to put forward a coherent plan for recruiting and retaining NHS staff. These omissions fatally undermine the credibility of its ambitions.
In addition, the plan concedes that for the first three years, it will focus mostly on reducing the elective waiting list. Much of the proposed transformation is deferred until after 2029, leaving future governments to grapple with implementation and consequences.
The plan also makes a deeply flawed claim: that NHS care in 2010 delivered quality services despite below-average European funding – implying that increased investment is neither needed nor desirable. This flies in the face of well-established evidence. Blair-era investment to match EU averages delivered the longest sustained improvement in NHS history. Campaigners warn that reversing this approach now, after a pandemic and a decade of austerity, is a betrayal of both patients and staff.
Its reliance on innovative medicines and AI and digital tools – like the NHS App replacing GPs or “virtual hospitals” bypassing primary care – signals an untested experiment with no clinical evidence base which seems to be motivated in large part by a desire to fuel economic growth and meet the demands of big tech and pharmaceutical corporation lobbyists. It gambles the future of patient care on unproven systems, without serious reflection on the likely costs of this tech, and despite major concerns about accuracy, bias and safety, while ignoring social care entirely. It also proposes mass genome sequencing of babies, raising deep ethical and practical questions as well as undermining tried and tested approaches to screening. Without public debate or consent, the government risks creating a privately run genetic surveillance system that could increase inequalities, damage trust, and divert resources from essential child health services as well as leave families without adequate clinical support post diagnosis.
This is a plan that talks up transformation but retreats from the values that underpin the NHS: universal, comprehensive, publicly funded and publicly provided care. SOS NHS members are calling for a real plan, one that confronts the workforce crisis, invests in infrastructure and public health, fixes social care, and puts patients – not profits – at the centre of care.”
——————–
Consequently, the real question here is for you to answer, Billy.
How credible is the plan you are pushing, and why do you deem it credible in the face of the evidence to the contrary?
What are your credible arguments? Have you actually got any credible arguments?
Dave – Is an opinion piece by a pressure group evidence?
🤔
Billy, is a plan put together at the behest and for the benefit of wealthy, powerful individuals and corporations a credible plan?
Billy, try sticking to the facts:
– Does privatisation of less costly procedures for the benefit of private sector carpetbaggers reducec NHS capacity while leaving complex, costly cases to already overstretched NHS teams or not?
– Does lack of proper public investment result in reduced staff levels and deterioration of services to the detriment of the citizenry or does it not?
– Is Professor Allyson Pollock’s recently published research showing that outsourcing elective care worsens health inequalities and that doubling down on a failed model correct or not? If not, give us your reasoning and counter evidence.
– Is much of the proposed transformation in this so-called plan deferred until after 2029, leaving future governments to grapple with implementation and consequences or not?
– Is an App replacing GPs or “virtual hospitals” , thereby bypassing primary care – an untested experiment with no clinical evidence base or not?
I can actually answer that last question from personal experience, Billy. It’s a bag of shit.
Now stop avoiding the issues and get on with answering the pertinent questions.
SteveH11/07/2025 at 9:35 pm
It’s a simple and straightforward question that doesn’t require any clarification.
Your 10 year plan most certainly does,
Nonce case.
Weasly trumpeting nonce case, at that.
So, nonce case….you best tell us what’s not to like about the sell-off of the most treasured (barely) remaining, state-owned asset.
Not that it affects you, because you’re (allegedly) working part time thousands of miles away.
Affects your daughter, and the better future you told her to vote for by proxy, though….or does it, walter?
Still lecturing part time, wee nonce?
Not long now….
Imagine trumpeting anything that emantes from that shrieking queen, weasly screeching.
But you do. Only you do.. That’s why you’re so highly regarded.
Tell us, O! genial one….
Will weasly be your next best of a bad bunch, wee nonce case? Should we look forward to that shrieking papier-mashy-headed, shit frankie howerd tribute as our slume minister?
No need. We all know the answer.
Toffee – “that shrieking queen”
Should we now add homophobia to your long list of ‘attributes’ ?
Ah! And there I was thinking Toffee was describing you, Billy.
Dave – Are you rea!ly that stupid?
Yet the description fits you so well, Billy.
Take the accolade.
Dave – Thanks for confirming that you are even more stupid than I thought.
Now that is genuinely funny, Billy.
Just who is it who has being feeding you the delusion that what comes out of your head represents “thinking”?
Meanwhile, TINA – the alleged only “credible” alternative, dissected:
https://unherdlimited.us16.list-manage.com/track/click?u=4a3053b52a708e8ba60bf45e9&id=2ce003e5b7&e=ed7c1fd365