So we are told:
More than 1,800 homes for the old and disabled are not providing decent care, with staff even failing to ensure that the frail and vulnerable are properly fed, the statistics from watchdogs reveal.
Campaigners said elderly people were being left in conditions which would not befit a dog, as shocking failings became \”systemic\” amid a deepening crisis in the sector.
But sadly there will be those who will have a political field day with the numbers rather than actually try and work out what\’s going wrong.
I can\’t find the actual report that is being referred to:
When spot checks were carried out on hundreds of care homes and nursing wards earlier this year they showed one in three were failing some of the watchdog\’s standards.
Ah, did you spot that little bit? Nursing wards?
Yes, for the CQC, who compiled the figures:
We regulate care provided by the NHS, local authorities, private companies and voluntary organisations.
Yes, this includes (or at least I assume it includes, for it includes nursing wards and those are provided by the NHS) state provided services as well as private sector provided.
Which is where the politics comes in. There will be those (I can name a few off the top of my head) who will insist that bad care in the private sector means that everything must be state provided. This could even be true: but to check what we\’d need to look at is the break down between private services doing things badly and public sector services doing things badly.
Which we don\’t as yet have so we cannot make any comparison at all.
The politics won\’t stop there either. Allow me the conceit that public sector results will be as bad as (possibly worse than) private sector. If true, we\’ll be told that public sector failings are simply because of a lack of money. While private sector will be because of the inherent inability of the private sector to provide such services: despite one of the private sector problems being the public sector lowering the amount they\’re willing to pay for services.
I will admit to being rather confused by certain peoples\’ reactions to these sorts of things. I can understand, even if disagree with, those who wanted to nationalise the railways, mines, steel works and all the rest. They (mistakenly in my view) thought that ownership of these commanded great power over the economy. Thus, to give power to the people it was necessary for the people to own them.
With care homes it\’s a purely utilitarian calculation: which system provides the best care for the least amount of money? There is no power nexus to be controlled here.
But we still seem to get that atavistic knee jerk reaction from the archaic left. we must have state ownership, well, because. Come on guys, old folks homes are hardly the commanding heights of the economy now, are they?