Romsey MP Caroline Nokes prompts action on anorexia

Romsey and Southampton North MP Caroline Nokes

Romsey and Southampton North MP Caroline Nokes

First published in News

MINISTERS vowed to act after hearing how long waits for treatment for anorexia victims in Southampton threatened lives.

A Commons debate – led by Caroline Nokes – the Romsey and Southampton North MP – highlighted the terrible toll from a range of eating disorders.

And it heard how a lack of cash and expertise forces patients into “potentially fatal” waits up to nine months for treatment at April House, a specialist centre in Southampton.

Ms Nokes told ministers: “Eating disorders are not trivial conditions. Anorexia kills in the region of 20 per cent of sufferers and 40 per cent never recover.

“It is the single biggest killer of all mental illnesses and, for too long, it was dismissed as a problem of teenage girls who just needed to get a grip of their eating patterns.”

And it was not just anorexia – other eating disorders included bulimia, binge eating, compulsive over eating, and food neophobia – an extreme fear of trying new food.

The Conservative MP backed the “very firm message I received from staff at April House” about the critical need for early action when sufferers reach out for help.

She added: “That opportunity can be very easily lost if there is not the availability of help at that time.

“A six to nine-month wait can be extremely dangerous, or even fatal, and, at the end of any such wait, the sufferer may have done increased damage to their body.”

Staff from April House were in the chamber to hear the debate, for which Ms Nokes won time after a petition to the backbench business committee.

The MP also paid tribute to Becky Petley, a Southampton teenager treated at April House, who now campaigns and fundraises for better treatment for eating disorders.

She said: “What struck me about Becky was her willingness to open up about her battle with anorexia and also some of the stark truths.”

Becky spoke to the Daily Echo last year, revealing how her eating disorder began when she started secondary school, leading to her admission to Southampton General Hospital last year.

In reply, Norman Lamb, the Liberal Democrat health minister, praised MPs, including Ms Nokes, for bringing forward the “powerful message” about the stigma.

Mr Lamb admitted: “Children and young people are still not getting the help they need.”

However, the minister insisted that would change, from April, when better specialist services would be required across England.

Mr Lamb told MPs: “This has the potential to improve the position in many parts of the country where specialist services are inadequate and, indeed, missing.”

More health stories

 

Comments (34)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

8:43am Fri 15 Feb 13

Yorkyboy22 says...

The lack of cash Ms Nokes and Mr Lamb speak of wouldn't have been helped by their voting in support of dismantling the NHS would it?
Hypocrites!
The lack of cash Ms Nokes and Mr Lamb speak of wouldn't have been helped by their voting in support of dismantling the NHS would it? Hypocrites! Yorkyboy22
  • Score: 0

10:14am Fri 15 Feb 13

Paramjit Bahia says...

Typical two faced Tory.

While cutting the resources of NHS have the cheek to pay lip service to serious medical condition.

Voters of Eastleigh have the chance to tell these Tory hypocrites and their bed fellows Lib Dem, (who told many times more lies to public to get elected than what Huhne may be going to jail for, but they are still free) what most of the nation thinks of these Coalition partners.

Both Tories and Lib Dem are enemies of our NHS, voters should protest by not only refusing to vote their candidates, but also by telling them to multiply themselves when they knock doors or make unsolicited phone calls.
Typical two faced Tory. While cutting the resources of NHS have the cheek to pay lip service to serious medical condition. Voters of Eastleigh have the chance to tell these Tory hypocrites and their bed fellows Lib Dem, (who told many times more lies to public to get elected than what Huhne may be going to jail for, but they are still free) what most of the nation thinks of these Coalition partners. Both Tories and Lib Dem are enemies of our NHS, voters should protest by not only refusing to vote their candidates, but also by telling them to multiply themselves when they knock doors or make unsolicited phone calls. Paramjit Bahia
  • Score: 0

11:31am Fri 15 Feb 13

J.P.M says...

Para.......?
Para.......? J.P.M
  • Score: 0

11:34am Fri 15 Feb 13

Yorkyboy22 says...

J.P.M wrote:
Para.......?
Looks like we are not supposed to mention the A word JPM. So much for free speech!
[quote][p][bold]J.P.M[/bold] wrote: Para.......?[/p][/quote]Looks like we are not supposed to mention the A word JPM. So much for free speech! Yorkyboy22
  • Score: 0

11:57am Fri 15 Feb 13

George4th says...

Paramjit Bahia wrote:
Typical two faced Tory.

While cutting the resources of NHS have the cheek to pay lip service to serious medical condition.

Voters of Eastleigh have the chance to tell these Tory hypocrites and their bed fellows Lib Dem, (who told many times more lies to public to get elected than what Huhne may be going to jail for, but they are still free) what most of the nation thinks of these Coalition partners.

Both Tories and Lib Dem are enemies of our NHS, voters should protest by not only refusing to vote their candidates, but also by telling them to multiply themselves when they knock doors or make unsolicited phone calls.
Labour knew the NHS was unsustainable as it was and they had 13 years to change the NHS culture which required radical updating. They didn't. What did they do? They threw loads of money at it, mostly in salaries! e.g. Doctors pay doubling!! Hugely increased the administration! (AND, they put a lot of the cases out to PRIVATE Health Care so don't blame the LibDem/Tories for that!)
>
People in this country must forget the days of the British Empire and realise that they are in the 21st century competing ferociously with the rest of the world and must pay their way as never before! One way of doing this is to be more efficient with your resources and that means CHANGE!!!
[quote][p][bold]Paramjit Bahia[/bold] wrote: Typical two faced Tory. While cutting the resources of NHS have the cheek to pay lip service to serious medical condition. Voters of Eastleigh have the chance to tell these Tory hypocrites and their bed fellows Lib Dem, (who told many times more lies to public to get elected than what Huhne may be going to jail for, but they are still free) what most of the nation thinks of these Coalition partners. Both Tories and Lib Dem are enemies of our NHS, voters should protest by not only refusing to vote their candidates, but also by telling them to multiply themselves when they knock doors or make unsolicited phone calls.[/p][/quote]Labour knew the NHS was unsustainable as it was and they had 13 years to change the NHS culture which required radical updating. They didn't. What did they do? They threw loads of money at it, mostly in salaries! e.g. Doctors pay doubling!! Hugely increased the administration! (AND, they put a lot of the cases out to PRIVATE Health Care so don't blame the LibDem/Tories for that!) > People in this country must forget the days of the British Empire and realise that they are in the 21st century competing ferociously with the rest of the world and must pay their way as never before! One way of doing this is to be more efficient with your resources and that means CHANGE!!! George4th
  • Score: 0

11:58am Fri 15 Feb 13

Stephen J says...

Yorkyboy22 wrote:
J.P.M wrote:
Para.......?
Looks like we are not supposed to mention the A word JPM. So much for free speech!
I think the paper has very good reason to ever so careful in what it allows to be said about Ms Nokes. There's history here.
[quote][p][bold]Yorkyboy22[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]J.P.M[/bold] wrote: Para.......?[/p][/quote]Looks like we are not supposed to mention the A word JPM. So much for free speech![/p][/quote]I think the paper has very good reason to ever so careful in what it allows to be said about Ms Nokes. There's history here. Stephen J
  • Score: 0

1:35pm Fri 15 Feb 13

Pomerol says...

Subject48 wrote:
this woman gets her gob into every situation she can PR in. F0kin parasite.
This is what another MP (Heather Wheeler) said about Caroline Nokes, which might make you reconsider your opinion, given she has been campaigning on this issue since her election:

"I begin by paying tribute to my hon. Friend the Member for Romsey and Southampton North (Caroline Nokes) for securing this very important debate during eating disorders awareness week 2013. She is respected by hon. Members on both sides of the House for her knowledge of this issue. I thank her for the tireless way she is championing an issue that is one of the most pressing and, if the medical profession’s statistics are to be believed, one of the most rapidly growing health issues that the nation faces. Indeed, male admissions to hospital are up by 68% in 10 years.

I also pay tribute to the all-party group on body image, of which my hon. Friend is the chair and which exists to inform the media, the fashion industry and wider society of the complex issues arising from poor body image. Body image is, as reported by the First Steps charity, which works in my constituency of South Derbyshire, one of the most significant causes of disordered eating behaviour. It is heartening that such groups exist and it is evidence that, in some small measure, awareness of the issue is starting to grow"

And another MP (Brooks Newmark):
"I apologise for not being here at the beginning of the debate. I was co-sponsoring the debate in the Chamber on violence against women and girls and could not be in two places at once. Like my hon. Friend the Member for South Basildon and East Thurrock (Stephen Metcalfe) I did not really expect to speak in the debate, but I want to pay tribute to my hon. Friend the Member for Romsey and Southampton North (Caroline Nokes), who has not only taken a huge interest in the issue but has taken on a leadership role. She has persuaded me to out myself—but not in the way my hon. Friend the Member for South Basildon and East Thurrock might think. It was the speech that you made, Mr Walker, that inspired me to think that those of us in a leadership role who have had problems must take on the responsibility of talking about them. If we do not, people will think that we glided to the top easily and that life was easy."

All I can say is, you should consider an apology given you clearly don't know what you are talking about.
[quote][p][bold]Subject48[/bold] wrote: this woman gets her gob into every situation she can PR in. F0kin parasite.[/p][/quote]This is what another MP (Heather Wheeler) said about Caroline Nokes, which might make you reconsider your opinion, given she has been campaigning on this issue since her election: "I begin by paying tribute to my hon. Friend the Member for Romsey and Southampton North (Caroline Nokes) for securing this very important debate during eating disorders awareness week 2013. She is respected by hon. Members on both sides of the House for her knowledge of this issue. I thank her for the tireless way she is championing an issue that is one of the most pressing and, if the medical profession’s statistics are to be believed, one of the most rapidly growing health issues that the nation faces. Indeed, male admissions to hospital are up by 68% in 10 years. I also pay tribute to the all-party group on body image, of which my hon. Friend is the chair and which exists to inform the media, the fashion industry and wider society of the complex issues arising from poor body image. Body image is, as reported by the First Steps charity, which works in my constituency of South Derbyshire, one of the most significant causes of disordered eating behaviour. It is heartening that such groups exist and it is evidence that, in some small measure, awareness of the issue is starting to grow" And another MP (Brooks Newmark): "I apologise for not being here at the beginning of the debate. I was co-sponsoring the debate in the Chamber on violence against women and girls and could not be in two places at once. Like my hon. Friend the Member for South Basildon and East Thurrock (Stephen Metcalfe) I did not really expect to speak in the debate, but I want to pay tribute to my hon. Friend the Member for Romsey and Southampton North (Caroline Nokes), who has not only taken a huge interest in the issue but has taken on a leadership role. She has persuaded me to out myself—but not in the way my hon. Friend the Member for South Basildon and East Thurrock might think. It was the speech that you made, Mr Walker, that inspired me to think that those of us in a leadership role who have had problems must take on the responsibility of talking about them. If we do not, people will think that we glided to the top easily and that life was easy." All I can say is, you should consider an apology given you clearly don't know what you are talking about. Pomerol
  • Score: 0

1:39pm Fri 15 Feb 13

Pomerol says...

Subject48 wrote:
this woman gets her gob into every situation she can PR in. F0kin parasite.
And another (Labour) MP: Mrs Mary Glindon (North Tyneside) (Lab):

It is a pleasure to speak in this debate under your chairmanship, Mrs Osborne. I, too, thank the Backbench Business Committee for allowing the debate. However, I particularly thank the hon. Member for Romsey and Southampton North (Caroline Nokes) for securing the debate. She and I are members of the all-party group on body image and, in calling for the debate, she has shown the commitment to, and concern about, the issue that demonstrate why she is deservedly the chair of our group"

Hardly a PR stunt then - even the Labour Party say she is 'deservedly' the chair of her committee!
[quote][p][bold]Subject48[/bold] wrote: this woman gets her gob into every situation she can PR in. F0kin parasite.[/p][/quote]And another (Labour) MP: Mrs Mary Glindon (North Tyneside) (Lab): It is a pleasure to speak in this debate under your chairmanship, Mrs Osborne. I, too, thank the Backbench Business Committee for allowing the debate. However, I particularly thank the hon. Member for Romsey and Southampton North (Caroline Nokes) for securing the debate. She and I are members of the all-party group on body image and, in calling for the debate, she has shown the commitment to, and concern about, the issue that demonstrate why she is deservedly the chair of our group" Hardly a PR stunt then - even the Labour Party say she is 'deservedly' the chair of her committee! Pomerol
  • Score: 0

1:41pm Fri 15 Feb 13

Pomerol says...

Paramjit Bahia wrote:
Typical two faced Tory.

While cutting the resources of NHS have the cheek to pay lip service to serious medical condition.

Voters of Eastleigh have the chance to tell these Tory hypocrites and their bed fellows Lib Dem, (who told many times more lies to public to get elected than what Huhne may be going to jail for, but they are still free) what most of the nation thinks of these Coalition partners.

Both Tories and Lib Dem are enemies of our NHS, voters should protest by not only refusing to vote their candidates, but also by telling them to multiply themselves when they knock doors or make unsolicited phone calls.
You really haven't studied history on this issue have you?
[quote][p][bold]Paramjit Bahia[/bold] wrote: Typical two faced Tory. While cutting the resources of NHS have the cheek to pay lip service to serious medical condition. Voters of Eastleigh have the chance to tell these Tory hypocrites and their bed fellows Lib Dem, (who told many times more lies to public to get elected than what Huhne may be going to jail for, but they are still free) what most of the nation thinks of these Coalition partners. Both Tories and Lib Dem are enemies of our NHS, voters should protest by not only refusing to vote their candidates, but also by telling them to multiply themselves when they knock doors or make unsolicited phone calls.[/p][/quote]You really haven't studied history on this issue have you? Pomerol
  • Score: 0

1:46pm Fri 15 Feb 13

Pomerol says...

Stephen J wrote:
Yorkyboy22 wrote:
J.P.M wrote:
Para.......?
Looks like we are not supposed to mention the A word JPM. So much for free speech!
I think the paper has very good reason to ever so careful in what it allows to be said about Ms Nokes. There's history here.
Yea - they made accusations after writing a large cheque to a man who claimed he had an affair with her. She had to endure a bit of a rough ride in the media, which was more than than the bloke ever did - despite his claims to the paper.

She had the last laugh though. The newspaper had to write her a (probably) much large cheque as a result!

Serves the media right!

Caveat Emptor!
[quote][p][bold]Stephen J[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Yorkyboy22[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]J.P.M[/bold] wrote: Para.......?[/p][/quote]Looks like we are not supposed to mention the A word JPM. So much for free speech![/p][/quote]I think the paper has very good reason to ever so careful in what it allows to be said about Ms Nokes. There's history here.[/p][/quote]Yea - they made accusations after writing a large cheque to a man who claimed he had an affair with her. She had to endure a bit of a rough ride in the media, which was more than than the bloke ever did - despite his claims to the paper. She had the last laugh though. The newspaper had to write her a (probably) much large cheque as a result! Serves the media right! Caveat Emptor! Pomerol
  • Score: 0

2:10pm Fri 15 Feb 13

Stephen J says...

Pomerol wrote:
Stephen J wrote:
Yorkyboy22 wrote:
J.P.M wrote:
Para.......?
Looks like we are not supposed to mention the A word JPM. So much for free speech!
I think the paper has very good reason to ever so careful in what it allows to be said about Ms Nokes. There's history here.
Yea - they made accusations after writing a large cheque to a man who claimed he had an affair with her. She had to endure a bit of a rough ride in the media, which was more than than the bloke ever did - despite his claims to the paper.

She had the last laugh though. The newspaper had to write her a (probably) much large cheque as a result!

Serves the media right!

Caveat Emptor!
Or, to put it another way, when you go looking for it: "Article not found".
[quote][p][bold]Pomerol[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Stephen J[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Yorkyboy22[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]J.P.M[/bold] wrote: Para.......?[/p][/quote]Looks like we are not supposed to mention the A word JPM. So much for free speech![/p][/quote]I think the paper has very good reason to ever so careful in what it allows to be said about Ms Nokes. There's history here.[/p][/quote]Yea - they made accusations after writing a large cheque to a man who claimed he had an affair with her. She had to endure a bit of a rough ride in the media, which was more than than the bloke ever did - despite his claims to the paper. She had the last laugh though. The newspaper had to write her a (probably) much large cheque as a result! Serves the media right! Caveat Emptor![/p][/quote]Or, to put it another way, when you go looking for it: "Article not found". Stephen J
  • Score: 0

2:10pm Fri 15 Feb 13

J.P.M says...

The former chief executive of the National Pony Club, has attracted many headlines over the years....
The former chief executive of the National Pony Club, has attracted many headlines over the years.... J.P.M
  • Score: 0

2:13pm Fri 15 Feb 13

Pomerol says...

J.P.M wrote:
The former chief executive of the National Pony Club, has attracted many headlines over the years....
most of them untrue it would seem!
[quote][p][bold]J.P.M[/bold] wrote: The former chief executive of the National Pony Club, has attracted many headlines over the years....[/p][/quote]most of them untrue it would seem! Pomerol
  • Score: 0

2:19pm Fri 15 Feb 13

Yorkyboy22 says...

Pomerol wrote:
Paramjit Bahia wrote: Typical two faced Tory. While cutting the resources of NHS have the cheek to pay lip service to serious medical condition. Voters of Eastleigh have the chance to tell these Tory hypocrites and their bed fellows Lib Dem, (who told many times more lies to public to get elected than what Huhne may be going to jail for, but they are still free) what most of the nation thinks of these Coalition partners. Both Tories and Lib Dem are enemies of our NHS, voters should protest by not only refusing to vote their candidates, but also by telling them to multiply themselves when they knock doors or make unsolicited phone calls.
You really haven't studied history on this issue have you?
Well I have studied it. From the King's Fund Quarterley report of Feb 2013 'There are 'growing worries' that the quality of NHS care in England will decline further in the coming year due to the ongoing efficiency savings drive'.
How much are Central Office paying you Pomeroi?
[quote][p][bold]Pomerol[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Paramjit Bahia[/bold] wrote: Typical two faced Tory. While cutting the resources of NHS have the cheek to pay lip service to serious medical condition. Voters of Eastleigh have the chance to tell these Tory hypocrites and their bed fellows Lib Dem, (who told many times more lies to public to get elected than what Huhne may be going to jail for, but they are still free) what most of the nation thinks of these Coalition partners. Both Tories and Lib Dem are enemies of our NHS, voters should protest by not only refusing to vote their candidates, but also by telling them to multiply themselves when they knock doors or make unsolicited phone calls.[/p][/quote]You really haven't studied history on this issue have you?[/p][/quote]Well I have studied it. From the King's Fund Quarterley report of Feb 2013 'There are 'growing worries' that the quality of NHS care in England will decline further in the coming year due to the ongoing efficiency savings drive'. How much are Central Office paying you Pomeroi? Yorkyboy22
  • Score: 0

2:26pm Fri 15 Feb 13

Pomerol says...

@Parmajit Bahia - nothing, I tell the truth for free. The Kings' Fund position can be countered by those who actually practice medicine (as oppossed to being a think tank) who see the move towards Clinical Commissioning Groups and away from PCTs as a good thing. This is especially the case for eating disorders, where there is a critical window for successful intervention which the old structures exacerbated, and the new ones will improve, as GPs and CCGs will now be able to better commission critical care at the point it is needed.

Waiting lists for treatment of eating disorders, in particular anorexia, which kills 20% of those who have it (making it the most lethal mental health issue to have) INCREASED under Labour.

Given that Government spending on the NHS has risen by £3bn in the first year after the General Election, and will continue to do so at above inflation levels, I fail to see how your position has any credibility given you objective is to attack the Tories rather than examine the facts.

Was it Andy Burnham, the Labour Health Minister, who wrote the note for his successor "there's no money left'?
@Parmajit Bahia - nothing, I tell the truth for free. The Kings' Fund position can be countered by those who actually practice medicine (as oppossed to being a think tank) who see the move towards Clinical Commissioning Groups and away from PCTs as a good thing. This is especially the case for eating disorders, where there is a critical window for successful intervention which the old structures exacerbated, and the new ones will improve, as GPs and CCGs will now be able to better commission critical care at the point it is needed. Waiting lists for treatment of eating disorders, in particular anorexia, which kills 20% of those who have it (making it the most lethal mental health issue to have) INCREASED under Labour. Given that Government spending on the NHS has risen by £3bn in the first year after the General Election, and will continue to do so at above inflation levels, I fail to see how your position has any credibility given you objective is to attack the Tories rather than examine the facts. Was it Andy Burnham, the Labour Health Minister, who wrote the note for his successor "there's no money left'? Pomerol
  • Score: 0

2:35pm Fri 15 Feb 13

Pomerol says...

Paramjit Bahia wrote:
Typical two faced Tory.

While cutting the resources of NHS have the cheek to pay lip service to serious medical condition.

Voters of Eastleigh have the chance to tell these Tory hypocrites and their bed fellows Lib Dem, (who told many times more lies to public to get elected than what Huhne may be going to jail for, but they are still free) what most of the nation thinks of these Coalition partners.

Both Tories and Lib Dem are enemies of our NHS, voters should protest by not only refusing to vote their candidates, but also by telling them to multiply themselves when they knock doors or make unsolicited phone calls.
"pay lip service to (sic) serious medical condition". Hmmmm - your own party colleague, a Labour MP slightly disagrees with you Parmajit!

Mrs Mary Glindon (North Tyneside) (Lab): "I particularly thank the hon. Member for Romsey and Southampton North (Caroline Nokes) for securing the debate..... She has shown the commitment to, and concern about, the issue that demonstrate why she is deservedly the chair of our group" (on Body Image).

Brooks Newmark (Braintree) (Cons): "I want to pay tribute to my hon. Friend the Member for Romsey and Southampton North (Caroline Nokes), who has not only taken a huge interest in the issue but has taken on a leadership role. She has persuaded me to out myself" (as a sufferer of anorexia).

Heather Wheeler (South Derbyshire) (Con): I begin by paying tribute to my hon. Friend the Member for Romsey and Southampton North (Caroline Nokes)....She is respected by hon. Members on both sides of the House for her knowledge of this issue. I thank her for the tireless way she is championing an issue that is one of the most pressing and, if the medical profession’s statistics are to be believed, one of the most rapidly growing health issues that the nation faces. I also pay tribute to the all-party group on body image, of which my hon. Friend is the chair and which exists to inform the media, the fashion industry and wider society of the complex issues arising from poor body image"

Hardly 'lip service'. What have you ever done to tackle eating disorders Parmajit?
[quote][p][bold]Paramjit Bahia[/bold] wrote: Typical two faced Tory. While cutting the resources of NHS have the cheek to pay lip service to serious medical condition. Voters of Eastleigh have the chance to tell these Tory hypocrites and their bed fellows Lib Dem, (who told many times more lies to public to get elected than what Huhne may be going to jail for, but they are still free) what most of the nation thinks of these Coalition partners. Both Tories and Lib Dem are enemies of our NHS, voters should protest by not only refusing to vote their candidates, but also by telling them to multiply themselves when they knock doors or make unsolicited phone calls.[/p][/quote]"pay lip service to (sic) serious medical condition". Hmmmm - your own party colleague, a Labour MP slightly disagrees with you Parmajit! Mrs Mary Glindon (North Tyneside) (Lab): "I particularly thank the hon. Member for Romsey and Southampton North (Caroline Nokes) for securing the debate..... She has shown the commitment to, and concern about, the issue that demonstrate why she is deservedly the chair of our group" (on Body Image). Brooks Newmark (Braintree) (Cons): "I want to pay tribute to my hon. Friend the Member for Romsey and Southampton North (Caroline Nokes), who has not only taken a huge interest in the issue but has taken on a leadership role. She has persuaded me to out myself" (as a sufferer of anorexia). Heather Wheeler (South Derbyshire) (Con): I begin by paying tribute to my hon. Friend the Member for Romsey and Southampton North (Caroline Nokes)....She is respected by hon. Members on both sides of the House for her knowledge of this issue. I thank her for the tireless way she is championing an issue that is one of the most pressing and, if the medical profession’s statistics are to be believed, one of the most rapidly growing health issues that the nation faces. I also pay tribute to the all-party group on body image, of which my hon. Friend is the chair and which exists to inform the media, the fashion industry and wider society of the complex issues arising from poor body image" Hardly 'lip service'. What have you ever done to tackle eating disorders Parmajit? Pomerol
  • Score: 0

3:01pm Fri 15 Feb 13

Yorkyboy22 says...

Pomerol wrote:
@Parmajit Bahia - nothing, I tell the truth for free. The Kings' Fund position can be countered by those who actually practice medicine (as oppossed to being a think tank) who see the move towards Clinical Commissioning Groups and away from PCTs as a good thing. This is especially the case for eating disorders, where there is a critical window for successful intervention which the old structures exacerbated, and the new ones will improve, as GPs and CCGs will now be able to better commission critical care at the point it is needed. Waiting lists for treatment of eating disorders, in particular anorexia, which kills 20% of those who have it (making it the most lethal mental health issue to have) INCREASED under Labour. Given that Government spending on the NHS has risen by £3bn in the first year after the General Election, and will continue to do so at above inflation levels, I fail to see how your position has any credibility given you objective is to attack the Tories rather than examine the facts. Was it Andy Burnham, the Labour Health Minister, who wrote the note for his successor "there's no money left'?
Pomerol - Conservatives were rebuked by the chair of the UK Statistics Authority, Andrew Dilnot, for falsely claiming to have increased real-terms spending on the NHS "in each of the last two years". In response to a complaint from the shadow health secretary, Andy Burnham, Dilnot stated that, contrary to recent Conservative statements, "expenditure on the NHS in real terms was lower in 2011-12 than it was in 2009-10". The most recent Treasury figures show that while real-terms spending rose by 0.09 per cent between 2010-11 and 2011-12, it fell by 0.84 per cent between 2009-10 and 2010-11. A significant cut followed by a paltry increase means that spending in 2011-12 (£104.3bn) was lower in real-terms (and in cash-terms) than in 2009-10 (£105.1bn)." As for the 'there's no money left' comment this was rehash of a Conservartive joke to the incoming Labour chancellor in the 1964.
I'm sure under the Tories that waiting times will come down as long as you have the money to pay for it!
[quote][p][bold]Pomerol[/bold] wrote: @Parmajit Bahia - nothing, I tell the truth for free. The Kings' Fund position can be countered by those who actually practice medicine (as oppossed to being a think tank) who see the move towards Clinical Commissioning Groups and away from PCTs as a good thing. This is especially the case for eating disorders, where there is a critical window for successful intervention which the old structures exacerbated, and the new ones will improve, as GPs and CCGs will now be able to better commission critical care at the point it is needed. Waiting lists for treatment of eating disorders, in particular anorexia, which kills 20% of those who have it (making it the most lethal mental health issue to have) INCREASED under Labour. Given that Government spending on the NHS has risen by £3bn in the first year after the General Election, and will continue to do so at above inflation levels, I fail to see how your position has any credibility given you objective is to attack the Tories rather than examine the facts. Was it Andy Burnham, the Labour Health Minister, who wrote the note for his successor "there's no money left'?[/p][/quote]Pomerol - Conservatives were rebuked by the chair of the UK Statistics Authority, Andrew Dilnot, for falsely claiming to have increased real-terms spending on the NHS "in each of the last two years". In response to a complaint from the shadow health secretary, Andy Burnham, Dilnot stated that, contrary to recent Conservative statements, "expenditure on the NHS in real terms was lower in 2011-12 than it was in 2009-10". The most recent Treasury figures show that while real-terms spending rose by 0.09 per cent between 2010-11 and 2011-12, it fell by 0.84 per cent between 2009-10 and 2010-11. A significant cut followed by a paltry increase means that spending in 2011-12 (£104.3bn) was lower in real-terms (and in cash-terms) than in 2009-10 (£105.1bn)." As for the 'there's no money left' comment this was rehash of a Conservartive joke to the incoming Labour chancellor in the 1964. I'm sure under the Tories that waiting times will come down as long as you have the money to pay for it! Yorkyboy22
  • Score: 0

3:09pm Fri 15 Feb 13

Pomerol says...

@YorkBoy22 - sorry, but even I know Dilnott got his sums wrong, because he started from the wrong baseline. He was incorrectly using the figures of the previous Government. If anything, Dilnott's figures, when gone over, show Labour planned to spend less than the Tories!

Maybe you missed the response from the Department of Health, which said: "For the first year of this Government's spending review, as Andrew Dilnot acknowledges, NHS spending increased in real terms compared to the previous year by 0.1%. The NHS budget will continue to increase in real terms during every year of the current spending review settlement."‪

As for Burnham's comments, they may have been intendde as a joke, but it was a pretty poorly judged joke given the mess the finances of the country were left in by the last Government. In 2010/11 the interest on Government debt was £43bn. We could not afford that level of deficit.
@YorkBoy22 - sorry, but even I know Dilnott got his sums wrong, because he started from the wrong baseline. He was incorrectly using the figures of the previous Government. If anything, Dilnott's figures, when gone over, show Labour planned to spend less than the Tories! Maybe you missed the response from the Department of Health, which said: "For the first year of this Government's spending review, as Andrew Dilnot acknowledges, NHS spending increased in real terms compared to the previous year by 0.1%. The NHS budget will continue to increase in real terms during every year of the current spending review settlement."‪ As for Burnham's comments, they may have been intendde as a joke, but it was a pretty poorly judged joke given the mess the finances of the country were left in by the last Government. In 2010/11 the interest on Government debt was £43bn. We could not afford that level of deficit. Pomerol
  • Score: 0

3:27pm Fri 15 Feb 13

Yorkyboy22 says...

Pomerol - from the article 'a lack of cash and expertise forces patients into “potentially fatal” waits up to nine months for treatment at April House'
I look forward to reading how Ms Nokes and Mr Hunt have sorted this out and that nice Mr Osborne is handing over the required funds as we speak. Or will nothing change and it will be all Gordon Brown's fault?
Pomerol - from the article 'a lack of cash and expertise forces patients into “potentially fatal” waits up to nine months for treatment at April House' I look forward to reading how Ms Nokes and Mr Hunt have sorted this out and that nice Mr Osborne is handing over the required funds as we speak. Or will nothing change and it will be all Gordon Brown's fault? Yorkyboy22
  • Score: 0

3:27pm Fri 15 Feb 13

Subject48 says...

Please save your self some trouble with the pr garbage. It’s all it is, I know it, and you know it.

Are you telling me her peers at the same trough are saying positive things about her!? Get out!!

I haven't been completely duped and brainwashed. Are you her PA or something?

If I cared about pr, I could also get some people to post how wonderful and thoughtful I am.

In fact, my dear friend Paramjit Bahia, has hit the nail on the head. Asking a daft question and trying to sound clever is not a valid counter-argument.

He works hard, cares for local issues, is a wonderful man and a pillar in his community. There, here is some PR statement I came up with in 2 minutes about my "hon. friend"

The fact is I am perfectly entitled to my own opinion that we are on about another self-serving individual part of a sick government.

Truth is, those statements have only claimed she took part in some debate with her friends and they are their opinions of her.

By no means do they constitute fact. Other then offer information that she’s part of a committee; which, in my opinion, is a PR move that looks good in the press. You are trying to manipulate readers through "opinions" of her peers.

She happy to be part of an institution which would essentially destroy over the next 3 years - if her conviction and commitment is to be believed, crucially important service to her - while happily sitting on the gravy train in the Tory party herself. Tory party, by principle and nature of their philosophy are against offering free public service including the service she seeks to defend. If I do not understand this correctly, please enlighten me and I would be more then happy to re-consider my view point. After all, I am only some obnoxious un-educated individual, produced by the great behemoth of successive failed governments. A spec of dust, sitting, uncomfortable on its great, bulging underbelly. The time of smoke and mirrors is over. We are getting tired.

The reality and facts do speak louder then any words of praise.

If you want me to feel sympathy or even remote empathy; I would like to hear about some regular front line volunteering...
Please save your self some trouble with the pr garbage. It’s all it is, I know it, and you know it. Are you telling me her peers at the same trough are saying positive things about her!? Get out!! I haven't been completely duped and brainwashed. Are you her PA or something? If I cared about pr, I could also get some people to post how wonderful and thoughtful I am. In fact, my dear friend Paramjit Bahia, has hit the nail on the head. Asking a daft question and trying to sound clever is not a valid counter-argument. He works hard, cares for local issues, is a wonderful man and a pillar in his community. There, here is some PR statement I came up with in 2 minutes about my "hon. friend" The fact is I am perfectly entitled to my own opinion that we are on about another self-serving individual part of a sick government. Truth is, those statements have only claimed she took part in some debate with her friends and they are their opinions of her. By no means do they constitute fact. Other then offer information that she’s part of a committee; which, in my opinion, is a PR move that looks good in the press. You are trying to manipulate readers through "opinions" of her peers. She happy to be part of an institution which would essentially destroy over the next 3 years - if her conviction and commitment is to be believed, crucially important service to her - while happily sitting on the gravy train in the Tory party herself. Tory party, by principle and nature of their philosophy are against offering free public service including the service she seeks to defend. If I do not understand this correctly, please enlighten me and I would be more then happy to re-consider my view point. After all, I am only some obnoxious un-educated individual, produced by the great behemoth of successive failed governments. A spec of dust, sitting, uncomfortable on its great, bulging underbelly. The time of smoke and mirrors is over. We are getting tired. The reality and facts do speak louder then any words of praise. If you want me to feel sympathy or even remote empathy; I would like to hear about some regular front line volunteering... Subject48
  • Score: 0

3:44pm Fri 15 Feb 13

Pomerol says...

Subject48. No, not her PA, just a father of teenage children, one of whom has problems in this area - hence my interest in the subject.

Why don't you speak to April House in Southampton, who deal with eating disorders and see what they have to say about her work on this issue. She is a regular visitor as I know from those who work there.

Or read her articles on the subject: http://conservativeh
ome.blogs.com/platfo
rm/2013/02/from-caro
linenokes.html

or here: http://www.dailymail
.co.uk/femail/articl
e-2225729/GP-said-ob
ese-M-S-real-women-s
etting-bad-example-u
tterly-wrong-says-MP
-Caroline-Nokes.html


Or the YMCA who work with her on this issue www.ymca.co.uk/bodyi
mage/parliament

or read the 'Body Confidence Report' which she and her committee worked on for six months.http://www.ym
ca.co.uk/bodyimage/r
eport

or look at the number of times she has appeared on the media speaking about eating disorders and body image issues.

And ask why at her request, another MP stood up in public and admitted he suffered from anorexia as a child.

Then maybe ask if your good friend's attack on her was warranted!
Subject48. No, not her PA, just a father of teenage children, one of whom has problems in this area - hence my interest in the subject. Why don't you speak to April House in Southampton, who deal with eating disorders and see what they have to say about her work on this issue. She is a regular visitor as I know from those who work there. Or read her articles on the subject: http://conservativeh ome.blogs.com/platfo rm/2013/02/from-caro linenokes.html or here: http://www.dailymail .co.uk/femail/articl e-2225729/GP-said-ob ese-M-S-real-women-s etting-bad-example-u tterly-wrong-says-MP -Caroline-Nokes.html Or the YMCA who work with her on this issue www.ymca.co.uk/bodyi mage/parliament or read the 'Body Confidence Report' which she and her committee worked on for six months.http://www.ym ca.co.uk/bodyimage/r eport or look at the number of times she has appeared on the media speaking about eating disorders and body image issues. And ask why at her request, another MP stood up in public and admitted he suffered from anorexia as a child. Then maybe ask if your good friend's attack on her was warranted! Pomerol
  • Score: 0

3:49pm Fri 15 Feb 13

Pomerol says...

Yorkyboy22 wrote:
Pomerol - from the article 'a lack of cash and expertise forces patients into “potentially fatal” waits up to nine months for treatment at April House'
I look forward to reading how Ms Nokes and Mr Hunt have sorted this out and that nice Mr Osborne is handing over the required funds as we speak. Or will nothing change and it will be all Gordon Brown's fault?
They haven't - hence the debate to ask them to! That was the whole purpose. Why aren't you supporting that call like the Labour MPs and Lib Dem MPs in the debate.

Moving away from PCTs and to CCGs will improve provision of immediate critical care for those suffering from eating disorders. Say what you will about the rest of the reforms, but this is the issue under discussion.

And as for Gordon Brown - well, if we weren't paying £43bn in debt interest each year.........that's equivalent to half the health budget!
[quote][p][bold]Yorkyboy22[/bold] wrote: Pomerol - from the article 'a lack of cash and expertise forces patients into “potentially fatal” waits up to nine months for treatment at April House' I look forward to reading how Ms Nokes and Mr Hunt have sorted this out and that nice Mr Osborne is handing over the required funds as we speak. Or will nothing change and it will be all Gordon Brown's fault?[/p][/quote]They haven't - hence the debate to ask them to! That was the whole purpose. Why aren't you supporting that call like the Labour MPs and Lib Dem MPs in the debate. Moving away from PCTs and to CCGs will improve provision of immediate critical care for those suffering from eating disorders. Say what you will about the rest of the reforms, but this is the issue under discussion. And as for Gordon Brown - well, if we weren't paying £43bn in debt interest each year.........that's equivalent to half the health budget! Pomerol
  • Score: 0

3:52pm Fri 15 Feb 13

Pomerol says...

Yorkyboy22 wrote:
Pomerol - from the article 'a lack of cash and expertise forces patients into “potentially fatal” waits up to nine months for treatment at April House'
I look forward to reading how Ms Nokes and Mr Hunt have sorted this out and that nice Mr Osborne is handing over the required funds as we speak. Or will nothing change and it will be all Gordon Brown's fault?
And finally, as the article itself said "Ministers vowed to act" as a result of the debate. How about a little recognition for the work she - and the Labour and Lib Dem MPs - have done on raising this issue and getting Government to think about it. She said in her own speech, the last time parliament debated the issue was in 2008 - that was two years before she got elected.

Do you have to be so dissmissive just because you don't like everything she votes for. Politics is not that black and white.
[quote][p][bold]Yorkyboy22[/bold] wrote: Pomerol - from the article 'a lack of cash and expertise forces patients into “potentially fatal” waits up to nine months for treatment at April House' I look forward to reading how Ms Nokes and Mr Hunt have sorted this out and that nice Mr Osborne is handing over the required funds as we speak. Or will nothing change and it will be all Gordon Brown's fault?[/p][/quote]And finally, as the article itself said "Ministers vowed to act" as a result of the debate. How about a little recognition for the work she - and the Labour and Lib Dem MPs - have done on raising this issue and getting Government to think about it. She said in her own speech, the last time parliament debated the issue was in 2008 - that was two years before she got elected. Do you have to be so dissmissive just because you don't like everything she votes for. Politics is not that black and white. Pomerol
  • Score: 0

5:58pm Fri 15 Feb 13

Yorkyboy22 says...

Pomerol wrote:
Yorkyboy22 wrote:
Pomerol - from the article 'a lack of cash and expertise forces patients into “potentially fatal” waits up to nine months for treatment at April House'
I look forward to reading how Ms Nokes and Mr Hunt have sorted this out and that nice Mr Osborne is handing over the required funds as we speak. Or will nothing change and it will be all Gordon Brown's fault?
And finally, as the article itself said "Ministers vowed to act" as a result of the debate. How about a little recognition for the work she - and the Labour and Lib Dem MPs - have done on raising this issue and getting Government to think about it. She said in her own speech, the last time parliament debated the issue was in 2008 - that was two years before she got elected.

Do you have to be so dissmissive just because you don't like everything she votes for. Politics is not that black and white.
Pomerol - I'm sorry about your family circumstances and I'll not bother debating this further as we will obviously disagree. I hope the required funding is received and that Ms Nokes really is better than my perceived opinion. Time will tell. Best wishes - YB
[quote][p][bold]Pomerol[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Yorkyboy22[/bold] wrote: Pomerol - from the article 'a lack of cash and expertise forces patients into “potentially fatal” waits up to nine months for treatment at April House' I look forward to reading how Ms Nokes and Mr Hunt have sorted this out and that nice Mr Osborne is handing over the required funds as we speak. Or will nothing change and it will be all Gordon Brown's fault?[/p][/quote]And finally, as the article itself said "Ministers vowed to act" as a result of the debate. How about a little recognition for the work she - and the Labour and Lib Dem MPs - have done on raising this issue and getting Government to think about it. She said in her own speech, the last time parliament debated the issue was in 2008 - that was two years before she got elected. Do you have to be so dissmissive just because you don't like everything she votes for. Politics is not that black and white.[/p][/quote]Pomerol - I'm sorry about your family circumstances and I'll not bother debating this further as we will obviously disagree. I hope the required funding is received and that Ms Nokes really is better than my perceived opinion. Time will tell. Best wishes - YB Yorkyboy22
  • Score: 0

6:25pm Fri 15 Feb 13

Pomerol says...

YB - Thank you for your graciousness.

All I know is Ms. Nokes is reported to be genuinely committed to this issue, and that is easily demonstrated from the amount of work she does on it - that isn't PR, but demonstrable. This is especially true for eating disorders where she seems to be the one MP really sticking up for those affected by them.

Obviously, she is a politician, and as such she has to be 'interested' (or perceived to be interested) in all the issues which all her constituents care about - that must be exhausting for anyone, and the expectations of politicians must be massive. But those who say the have met her, including those who are openly not Tories, say she is genuine, funny, self-deprecating and wanting to 'do the right thing'. I don't understand why a few people seem to have such a problem with her. I don't agree with her party or her on many things, but I hope I'd be willing to look past the rossette and recognise when she seems to be motivated by good things to do good things.

John Denham and Alan Whitehead are reported to think very highly of her too if that helps.

Politics doesn't always have to be partisan and is often better when it isn't.
YB - Thank you for your graciousness. All I know is Ms. Nokes is reported to be genuinely committed to this issue, and that is easily demonstrated from the amount of work she does on it - that isn't PR, but demonstrable. This is especially true for eating disorders where she seems to be the one MP really sticking up for those affected by them. Obviously, she is a politician, and as such she has to be 'interested' (or perceived to be interested) in all the issues which all her constituents care about - that must be exhausting for anyone, and the expectations of politicians must be massive. But those who say the have met her, including those who are openly not Tories, say she is genuine, funny, self-deprecating and wanting to 'do the right thing'. I don't understand why a few people seem to have such a problem with her. I don't agree with her party or her on many things, but I hope I'd be willing to look past the rossette and recognise when she seems to be motivated by good things to do good things. John Denham and Alan Whitehead are reported to think very highly of her too if that helps. Politics doesn't always have to be partisan and is often better when it isn't. Pomerol
  • Score: 0

7:36pm Fri 15 Feb 13

Yorkyboy22 says...

Pomerol wrote:
YB - Thank you for your graciousness.

All I know is Ms. Nokes is reported to be genuinely committed to this issue, and that is easily demonstrated from the amount of work she does on it - that isn't PR, but demonstrable. This is especially true for eating disorders where she seems to be the one MP really sticking up for those affected by them.

Obviously, she is a politician, and as such she has to be 'interested' (or perceived to be interested) in all the issues which all her constituents care about - that must be exhausting for anyone, and the expectations of politicians must be massive. But those who say the have met her, including those who are openly not Tories, say she is genuine, funny, self-deprecating and wanting to 'do the right thing'. I don't understand why a few people seem to have such a problem with her. I don't agree with her party or her on many things, but I hope I'd be willing to look past the rossette and recognise when she seems to be motivated by good things to do good things.

John Denham and Alan Whitehead are reported to think very highly of her too if that helps.

Politics doesn't always have to be partisan and is often better when it isn't.
Pomerol - Actually yes if the Labour MPs quoted believe she is really committed to this it does help. Maybe she is not all bad. As I said best of luck anyway & it is good if a concensus can be agreed. Hope you get the funding. Cheers - YB
[quote][p][bold]Pomerol[/bold] wrote: YB - Thank you for your graciousness. All I know is Ms. Nokes is reported to be genuinely committed to this issue, and that is easily demonstrated from the amount of work she does on it - that isn't PR, but demonstrable. This is especially true for eating disorders where she seems to be the one MP really sticking up for those affected by them. Obviously, she is a politician, and as such she has to be 'interested' (or perceived to be interested) in all the issues which all her constituents care about - that must be exhausting for anyone, and the expectations of politicians must be massive. But those who say the have met her, including those who are openly not Tories, say she is genuine, funny, self-deprecating and wanting to 'do the right thing'. I don't understand why a few people seem to have such a problem with her. I don't agree with her party or her on many things, but I hope I'd be willing to look past the rossette and recognise when she seems to be motivated by good things to do good things. John Denham and Alan Whitehead are reported to think very highly of her too if that helps. Politics doesn't always have to be partisan and is often better when it isn't.[/p][/quote]Pomerol - Actually yes if the Labour MPs quoted believe she is really committed to this it does help. Maybe she is not all bad. As I said best of luck anyway & it is good if a concensus can be agreed. Hope you get the funding. Cheers - YB Yorkyboy22
  • Score: 0

10:18pm Fri 15 Feb 13

Paramjit Bahia says...

Pomerol wrote:
@Parmajit Bahia - nothing, I tell the truth for free. The Kings' Fund position can be countered by those who actually practice medicine (as oppossed to being a think tank) who see the move towards Clinical Commissioning Groups and away from PCTs as a good thing. This is especially the case for eating disorders, where there is a critical window for successful intervention which the old structures exacerbated, and the new ones will improve, as GPs and CCGs will now be able to better commission critical care at the point it is needed.

Waiting lists for treatment of eating disorders, in particular anorexia, which kills 20% of those who have it (making it the most lethal mental health issue to have) INCREASED under Labour.

Given that Government spending on the NHS has risen by £3bn in the first year after the General Election, and will continue to do so at above inflation levels, I fail to see how your position has any credibility given you objective is to attack the Tories rather than examine the facts.

Was it Andy Burnham, the Labour Health Minister, who wrote the note for his successor "there's no money left'?
Thanks for interesting info.

No it was not Burnham it was sombody else, can't remember his name but he has bald head like me but lot younger.

Yes he did leave a note there in no money left.

I wonder what both Tories and LibDem cabinet members be saying in their notes when they get voted out by the people. I think all of them will writting:

'We have made the country bankrupt plenty of bills still to be paid hope you can sort out our mess'
[quote][p][bold]Pomerol[/bold] wrote: @Parmajit Bahia - nothing, I tell the truth for free. The Kings' Fund position can be countered by those who actually practice medicine (as oppossed to being a think tank) who see the move towards Clinical Commissioning Groups and away from PCTs as a good thing. This is especially the case for eating disorders, where there is a critical window for successful intervention which the old structures exacerbated, and the new ones will improve, as GPs and CCGs will now be able to better commission critical care at the point it is needed. Waiting lists for treatment of eating disorders, in particular anorexia, which kills 20% of those who have it (making it the most lethal mental health issue to have) INCREASED under Labour. Given that Government spending on the NHS has risen by £3bn in the first year after the General Election, and will continue to do so at above inflation levels, I fail to see how your position has any credibility given you objective is to attack the Tories rather than examine the facts. Was it Andy Burnham, the Labour Health Minister, who wrote the note for his successor "there's no money left'?[/p][/quote]Thanks for interesting info. No it was not Burnham it was sombody else, can't remember his name but he has bald head like me but lot younger. Yes he did leave a note there in no money left. I wonder what both Tories and LibDem cabinet members be saying in their notes when they get voted out by the people. I think all of them will writting: 'We have made the country bankrupt plenty of bills still to be paid hope you can sort out our mess' Paramjit Bahia
  • Score: 0

10:23pm Fri 15 Feb 13

Paramjit Bahia says...

Pomerol wrote:
Paramjit Bahia wrote:
Typical two faced Tory.

While cutting the resources of NHS have the cheek to pay lip service to serious medical condition.

Voters of Eastleigh have the chance to tell these Tory hypocrites and their bed fellows Lib Dem, (who told many times more lies to public to get elected than what Huhne may be going to jail for, but they are still free) what most of the nation thinks of these Coalition partners.

Both Tories and Lib Dem are enemies of our NHS, voters should protest by not only refusing to vote their candidates, but also by telling them to multiply themselves when they knock doors or make unsolicited phone calls.
"pay lip service to (sic) serious medical condition". Hmmmm - your own party colleague, a Labour MP slightly disagrees with you Parmajit!

Mrs Mary Glindon (North Tyneside) (Lab): "I particularly thank the hon. Member for Romsey and Southampton North (Caroline Nokes) for securing the debate..... She has shown the commitment to, and concern about, the issue that demonstrate why she is deservedly the chair of our group" (on Body Image).

Brooks Newmark (Braintree) (Cons): "I want to pay tribute to my hon. Friend the Member for Romsey and Southampton North (Caroline Nokes), who has not only taken a huge interest in the issue but has taken on a leadership role. She has persuaded me to out myself" (as a sufferer of anorexia).

Heather Wheeler (South Derbyshire) (Con): I begin by paying tribute to my hon. Friend the Member for Romsey and Southampton North (Caroline Nokes)....She is respected by hon. Members on both sides of the House for her knowledge of this issue. I thank her for the tireless way she is championing an issue that is one of the most pressing and, if the medical profession’s statistics are to be believed, one of the most rapidly growing health issues that the nation faces. I also pay tribute to the all-party group on body image, of which my hon. Friend is the chair and which exists to inform the media, the fashion industry and wider society of the complex issues arising from poor body image"

Hardly 'lip service'. What have you ever done to tackle eating disorders Parmajit?
For your info I left Labour Party in 1996 to stay a socialist. For last few years I have not been member of any political party, so I do not want others sins hanging around my neck.
[quote][p][bold]Pomerol[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Paramjit Bahia[/bold] wrote: Typical two faced Tory. While cutting the resources of NHS have the cheek to pay lip service to serious medical condition. Voters of Eastleigh have the chance to tell these Tory hypocrites and their bed fellows Lib Dem, (who told many times more lies to public to get elected than what Huhne may be going to jail for, but they are still free) what most of the nation thinks of these Coalition partners. Both Tories and Lib Dem are enemies of our NHS, voters should protest by not only refusing to vote their candidates, but also by telling them to multiply themselves when they knock doors or make unsolicited phone calls.[/p][/quote]"pay lip service to (sic) serious medical condition". Hmmmm - your own party colleague, a Labour MP slightly disagrees with you Parmajit! Mrs Mary Glindon (North Tyneside) (Lab): "I particularly thank the hon. Member for Romsey and Southampton North (Caroline Nokes) for securing the debate..... She has shown the commitment to, and concern about, the issue that demonstrate why she is deservedly the chair of our group" (on Body Image). Brooks Newmark (Braintree) (Cons): "I want to pay tribute to my hon. Friend the Member for Romsey and Southampton North (Caroline Nokes), who has not only taken a huge interest in the issue but has taken on a leadership role. She has persuaded me to out myself" (as a sufferer of anorexia). Heather Wheeler (South Derbyshire) (Con): I begin by paying tribute to my hon. Friend the Member for Romsey and Southampton North (Caroline Nokes)....She is respected by hon. Members on both sides of the House for her knowledge of this issue. I thank her for the tireless way she is championing an issue that is one of the most pressing and, if the medical profession’s statistics are to be believed, one of the most rapidly growing health issues that the nation faces. I also pay tribute to the all-party group on body image, of which my hon. Friend is the chair and which exists to inform the media, the fashion industry and wider society of the complex issues arising from poor body image" Hardly 'lip service'. What have you ever done to tackle eating disorders Parmajit?[/p][/quote]For your info I left Labour Party in 1996 to stay a socialist. For last few years I have not been member of any political party, so I do not want others sins hanging around my neck. Paramjit Bahia
  • Score: 0

10:43pm Fri 15 Feb 13

Paramjit Bahia says...

Echo has done the right thing by removing some unsavoury comments about the private life of Caroline Noaks MP.

Well done Echo.

It is sad that some contributors on this site are still trying to repeat the same unsavoury standards through the back door i.e. hint innuendos and insinuation or whatever.

This is bad practice; we should be concerned about the policies not the private lives of any individual.

Or before start throwing dirt around ask ourselves, if we ourselves are exactly saints? Or how will we feel if one of our own family members is subjected to such treatment in a public forum?
Echo has done the right thing by removing some unsavoury comments about the private life of Caroline Noaks MP. Well done Echo. It is sad that some contributors on this site are still trying to repeat the same unsavoury standards through the back door i.e. hint innuendos and insinuation or whatever. This is bad practice; we should be concerned about the policies not the private lives of any individual. Or before start throwing dirt around ask ourselves, if we ourselves are exactly saints? Or how will we feel if one of our own family members is subjected to such treatment in a public forum? Paramjit Bahia
  • Score: 0

10:51pm Fri 15 Feb 13

Pomerol says...

Parmajit - the papers removed the stories and the comments about Ms. Nokes because they were not true. You comments are very valid therefore.

I don't think anyone should be lied about - and I don't think newspapers should pay money to people to tell lies which they then publish to sell papers.
Parmajit - the papers removed the stories and the comments about Ms. Nokes because they were not true. You comments are very valid therefore. I don't think anyone should be lied about - and I don't think newspapers should pay money to people to tell lies which they then publish to sell papers. Pomerol
  • Score: 0

12:03pm Sat 16 Feb 13

Pomerol says...

Yorkyboy22 wrote:
Pomerol wrote:
YB - Thank you for your graciousness.

All I know is Ms. Nokes is reported to be genuinely committed to this issue, and that is easily demonstrated from the amount of work she does on it - that isn't PR, but demonstrable. This is especially true for eating disorders where she seems to be the one MP really sticking up for those affected by them.

Obviously, she is a politician, and as such she has to be 'interested' (or perceived to be interested) in all the issues which all her constituents care about - that must be exhausting for anyone, and the expectations of politicians must be massive. But those who say the have met her, including those who are openly not Tories, say she is genuine, funny, self-deprecating and wanting to 'do the right thing'. I don't understand why a few people seem to have such a problem with her. I don't agree with her party or her on many things, but I hope I'd be willing to look past the rossette and recognise when she seems to be motivated by good things to do good things.

John Denham and Alan Whitehead are reported to think very highly of her too if that helps.

Politics doesn't always have to be partisan and is often better when it isn't.
Pomerol - Actually yes if the Labour MPs quoted believe she is really committed to this it does help. Maybe she is not all bad. As I said best of luck anyway & it is good if a concensus can be agreed. Hope you get the funding. Cheers - YB
YB - I wonder if these comments from the Minister better explain what I mean, and why the NHS reforms you were critical off are 'good news' for mental health patients. It's a bit technical, but you seem well able to understand this kind of thing.This comes from the Debate which Caroline Nokes secured.

"There is an institutional bias against mental health. The way that money flows within the NHS disadvantages mental health. There is an 18-week target for physical health care and a tariff, meaning that every patient takes money with them into acute hospitals. Money is sucked through into acute hospitals, and there is great political pressure from every side to maintain the 18-week target. There is no equivalent in mental health. There is no right of access. Waiting nine months to access care and treatment is completely unacceptable. We must challenge that. The hon. Member for Romsey and Southampton North made some incredibly important points. She mentioned her local organisation, April House in Southampton, and the fantastic work that it does, and she spoke about the absolute importance of raising awareness in primary care. Some people are lucky enough to find a GP who understands mental health and is passionate about it, but some are not. Families with a GP who just does not get it can be desperate; they have nowhere to turn. There is a need to raise awareness. In the first mandate, a set of priorities published by the Government for the new NHS Commissioning Board, mental health has been given a higher priority than it has ever had in the NHS. The mandate makes it clear that the NHS is under a legal obligation to deliver demonstrable progress towards parity of esteem by 2015. That means treating mental health on a par with physical health. By placing the commissioning board under that obligation and disseminating the message to clinical commissioning groups, we will start to make progress on forcing the system to recognise the importance of treating mental health and physical health equally. It will not happen overnight, but it is a journey that we must take to improve the condition of many people. The hon. Lady discussed the impact on families and the unfair sense of guilt that many experience. She also mentioned waiting times, which in many cases are simply unacceptable........
I was struck by what the hon. Lady said about recovery groups. This morning I spoke at a conference on mental health. I spoke specifically about recovery and a new way of looking at mental health. We must move from trying simply to treat the condition to working collaboratively with professionals and people experiencing the condition, and we must focus on recovery. Fantastic results are being demonstrated from that shift in approach. It is frustrating that in some parts of the country, great things are happening, but it is patchy, as many hon. Members have said, and improvement is needed. She also made the point that mental health is the poor relation, as I have acknowledged. That must change".
[quote][p][bold]Yorkyboy22[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Pomerol[/bold] wrote: YB - Thank you for your graciousness. All I know is Ms. Nokes is reported to be genuinely committed to this issue, and that is easily demonstrated from the amount of work she does on it - that isn't PR, but demonstrable. This is especially true for eating disorders where she seems to be the one MP really sticking up for those affected by them. Obviously, she is a politician, and as such she has to be 'interested' (or perceived to be interested) in all the issues which all her constituents care about - that must be exhausting for anyone, and the expectations of politicians must be massive. But those who say the have met her, including those who are openly not Tories, say she is genuine, funny, self-deprecating and wanting to 'do the right thing'. I don't understand why a few people seem to have such a problem with her. I don't agree with her party or her on many things, but I hope I'd be willing to look past the rossette and recognise when she seems to be motivated by good things to do good things. John Denham and Alan Whitehead are reported to think very highly of her too if that helps. Politics doesn't always have to be partisan and is often better when it isn't.[/p][/quote]Pomerol - Actually yes if the Labour MPs quoted believe she is really committed to this it does help. Maybe she is not all bad. As I said best of luck anyway & it is good if a concensus can be agreed. Hope you get the funding. Cheers - YB[/p][/quote]YB - I wonder if these comments from the Minister better explain what I mean, and why the NHS reforms you were critical off are 'good news' for mental health patients. It's a bit technical, but you seem well able to understand this kind of thing.This comes from the Debate which Caroline Nokes secured. "There is an institutional bias against mental health. The way that money flows within the NHS disadvantages mental health. There is an 18-week target for physical health care and a tariff, meaning that every patient takes money with them into acute hospitals. Money is sucked through into acute hospitals, and there is great political pressure from every side to maintain the 18-week target. There is no equivalent in mental health. There is no right of access. Waiting nine months to access care and treatment is completely unacceptable. We must challenge that. The hon. Member for Romsey and Southampton North made some incredibly important points. She mentioned her local organisation, April House in Southampton, and the fantastic work that it does, and she spoke about the absolute importance of raising awareness in primary care. Some people are lucky enough to find a GP who understands mental health and is passionate about it, but some are not. Families with a GP who just does not get it can be desperate; they have nowhere to turn. There is a need to raise awareness. In the first mandate, a set of priorities published by the Government for the new NHS Commissioning Board, mental health has been given a higher priority than it has ever had in the NHS. The mandate makes it clear that the NHS is under a legal obligation to deliver demonstrable progress towards parity of esteem by 2015. That means treating mental health on a par with physical health. By placing the commissioning board under that obligation and disseminating the message to clinical commissioning groups, we will start to make progress on forcing the system to recognise the importance of treating mental health and physical health equally. It will not happen overnight, but it is a journey that we must take to improve the condition of many people. The hon. Lady discussed the impact on families and the unfair sense of guilt that many experience. She also mentioned waiting times, which in many cases are simply unacceptable........ I was struck by what the hon. Lady said about recovery groups. This morning I spoke at a conference on mental health. I spoke specifically about recovery and a new way of looking at mental health. We must move from trying simply to treat the condition to working collaboratively with professionals and people experiencing the condition, and we must focus on recovery. Fantastic results are being demonstrated from that shift in approach. It is frustrating that in some parts of the country, great things are happening, but it is patchy, as many hon. Members have said, and improvement is needed. She also made the point that mental health is the poor relation, as I have acknowledged. That must change". Pomerol
  • Score: 0

12:21pm Sat 16 Feb 13

Pomerol says...

This is why the reforms ARE a good thing.

1. It enables GPs to better 'commission' mental health care, meaning reduced immediate and hypothecated costs, and quicker access to acute mental health services without the waiting times (this is a direct result of moving towards GP commissioning, which the Labour Party are utterly misrepresenting), and away from PCTs. This is not the 'privatisation' of the NHS, but just moving where and how the money is spent into the GPs hands away from larger and more unresponsive PCTs.

2. It forces the system to recognise the importance of mental health, and enable people like my son to access services (like April House in Southampton) much more quickly. When you have a child with a condition with a death rate of 20%, and the child says 'I want help now', you cannot wait 9 months! The old system does this to you. The new system will improve this.

3. It enables funds to be better used to better provide mental health services. More money going further.

If this was a bad thing, or the privatisation of the NHS by the back door, I am a Chinaman!

This should not be party political, but it has become so because the Unions are opposed to any sensible reform because they believe it weakens the power of the Unionised public sector workers.

What matters surely is that care remains 'free at the point of delivery' (which it still will under these reforms) and affordable to the tax payer. What matters more - patient outcomes or rigid ideological opposition to reforms which improve things for the patient, but protect the NHS employee?

Yes, we all 'love our NHS', but it is at the end of the day there to do a job - as are the staff. Teary-eyed sentimentalism and the rights of the employees should not stand in the way of the patient's and tax payers best interests.

opposition to the reforms, particularly the reforms I have just mentioned, are dressed-up as patient care, but are actually about ensuring the power of the existing pro-union NHS structures remain unchallenged.

I giveth not a fig for ideology. I just want those paid to look after my children to do so without giving me a lecture in public policy and political philosophy. They are medics, so practice medicine and NOT politics.
This is why the reforms ARE a good thing. 1. It enables GPs to better 'commission' mental health care, meaning reduced immediate and hypothecated costs, and quicker access to acute mental health services without the waiting times (this is a direct result of moving towards GP commissioning, which the Labour Party are utterly misrepresenting), and away from PCTs. This is not the 'privatisation' of the NHS, but just moving where and how the money is spent into the GPs hands away from larger and more unresponsive PCTs. 2. It forces the system to recognise the importance of mental health, and enable people like my son to access services (like April House in Southampton) much more quickly. When you have a child with a condition with a death rate of 20%, and the child says 'I want help now', you cannot wait 9 months! The old system does this to you. The new system will improve this. 3. It enables funds to be better used to better provide mental health services. More money going further. If this was a bad thing, or the privatisation of the NHS by the back door, I am a Chinaman! This should not be party political, but it has become so because the Unions are opposed to any sensible reform because they believe it weakens the power of the Unionised public sector workers. What matters surely is that care remains 'free at the point of delivery' (which it still will under these reforms) and affordable to the tax payer. What matters more - patient outcomes or rigid ideological opposition to reforms which improve things for the patient, but protect the NHS employee? Yes, we all 'love our NHS', but it is at the end of the day there to do a job - as are the staff. Teary-eyed sentimentalism and the rights of the employees should not stand in the way of the patient's and tax payers best interests. opposition to the reforms, particularly the reforms I have just mentioned, are dressed-up as patient care, but are actually about ensuring the power of the existing pro-union NHS structures remain unchallenged. I giveth not a fig for ideology. I just want those paid to look after my children to do so without giving me a lecture in public policy and political philosophy. They are medics, so practice medicine and NOT politics. Pomerol
  • Score: 0

1:32pm Sat 16 Feb 13

Subject48 says...

I wish your family all the best.

We have very different view points, and will have to agree to disagree :)
I wish your family all the best. We have very different view points, and will have to agree to disagree :) Subject48
  • Score: 0

2:14pm Sat 16 Feb 13

Pomerol says...

Perhaps people who doubt the value and/or sinverity of Caroline Nokes on this issue, can visit this blog post, which talks about the debate.

http://www.staystron
g22.blogspot.co.uk/2
013/02/parliamentary
-debate-during-eatin
g.html?m=1
Perhaps people who doubt the value and/or sinverity of Caroline Nokes on this issue, can visit this blog post, which talks about the debate. http://www.staystron g22.blogspot.co.uk/2 013/02/parliamentary -debate-during-eatin g.html?m=1 Pomerol
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree