A very interesting and thought provoking thread.

I have long felt that the NHS is one of the biggest challenges facing any modern day Government. It and the world has changed fundamentally since it was established, and we need to review the role and function of the organisation.

I have never understood the aversion to private healthcare. Banning it would just increase demands on the NHS, while many would get around such a ban by having treatement abroad. With many people now getting private healthcare from their employer, private provision is no longer a preserve of the rich.

The many vested interests that exist within the NHS need to be challenged as well. Like one of the previous posters, I have recently started doing consultancy work with the NHS, and continue to be amazed by the needless complexity of everything and the paper pushing beurocracy that prevents anything getting done, bar increasing costs.

And it isn’t just the management that needs reform – the doctors and surgeons have managed to get themselves very cushy numbers indeed.

The problem, though, is that any attempt at any large scale reform is almost politically impossible since, as we have recently seen, the vested interests soon start to scare monger once change is mooted.

I have never thought that the NHS should be sacrosanct. The concept that the UK has the best possible healthcare provision that is free at the point of delivery should be. It is a pity that as a society we are unable to debate how to make that happen without the pavlovian response that any attempts to reform the NHS generate.

Great to see the Air Ecosse photos.

They operated a daily flight to East Midlands. It left at about 0700 for Edinburgh, going on to Aberdeen and Wick. The aircraft would then spend the day in Scotland before retracing its route and would arrive back at EMA at about 8pm, meaning you could only see it in the middle of the summer.

A great thread on a great aircraft.

Particularly good to see the photos of G-BMHX – I made many happy trips on HX bouncing along between East Midlands and Heathrow.

Here are some of my photos, starting with Air Europe Express G-BJFK 3-30 at Exeter:-

G-BJFK by IndiaEcho Photography, on Flickr

FK spent a few years plying the East Midlands – Heathrow route during its time with British Midland.

Speaking of East Midlands, here is Capital 3-60 G-OLBA:-

G-OLBA by IndiaEcho Photography, on Flickr

Capital were a rare visitor to East Midlands, being based at Leeds Bradford. BA was carrying out a charter flight to Le Bourget.

Britsh Air Ferries will always be associated with the Viscount, but they also operated the Shorts 3-30 for a while. Here G-BEEO is arriving at Southampton following a flight from Jersey.

G-BEEO by IndiaEcho Photography, on Flickr

Guernsey Airlines operated a fleet of Shorts 3-30s and Viscounts in addition to the Shorts 3-60. Here G-RMSS is arriving at Southampton in 1987 to operate a service to Paris on behalf of parent company British Air Ferries:-

G-RMSS by IndiaEcho Photography, on Flickr

Air UK had used to base a couple of F-27s at Southampton to operate services to the Channel Islands, but in this 1986 shot, Shorts SD3-60 G-BLZT is briefly resting at Southampton after arriving from Exeter to pick up more passengers for a flight to Amsterdam:-

G-BLZT by IndiaEcho Photography, on Flickr

To finish it is back to East Midlands. British Midland operated two 3-60s – one flew between the airport and Heathrow, the other served the capital from Birmingham. At the weekend, flights were reduced, and in this photo G-BMHY came over from Birmingham for some circuit bashing while HX watched from the apron:-

G-BMHX by IndiaEcho Photography, on Flickr

I hope the photos are of interest – apologies as I have posted some of them before.

Neil

I’m no fan of the Olympics, and wish they were happening elsewhere, but I don’t have a problem with the contents of the original post. The organisers should be congratulated for confirming that they won’t be pursuing legal claims against people who publish photos on the internet not for commercial gain.

Just about every event and attraction has a restriction preventing the commercial use of photos taken at it. Try selling photos taken at a premier league football match, air show or aviation museum and see how far you get before you get a call from their lawyers unless you have the relevant permissions (and have paid the relevant fees) – why should the Olympics be any different?

And Bmused, no I don’t think you read that negative comments will be removed from the media – that is even more unenforcable! Of course, media accreditation maybe taken away from organisations that are particularly critical, but again, you can’t really blame the organisers for that can you?

Lincoln 7 – the average age of members of the House of Lords is currently 69. You would expect members of it to be skewed towards older people both as a consequence of it being comprised of people of significance and the average age to be further increased as membership is for life.

And as Moggy says, only just over 10% are now hereditary peers.

I’m still intruiged by your apparent support for the House of Lords being able to throw out legislation that has been passed by a large majority in the Commons 3 times. That can’t be right can it, and surely in those situations the Government has done the right thing by using the Parliament Act to overcome blocks by the unelected House of Lords?

I thought that the Sunday Trading Laws limited big stores opening times on a Sunday as a sop to the small business lobby by allowing smaller businesses to open for longer than their larger competitors.

If that is the case, it is rather unfortunate that the Chancellor has chosen to relax the Laws for the Olympics period when smaller businesses may have appreciated the extra custom.

Regarding wider changes to Sunday trading legislation, I’m fairly ambivalent. If there are arguments in favour of further deregulation, I don’t think that protecting Churches would be a valid excuse for not making changes though.

It is a wider argument, but they shouldn’t have a veto on this or other legislation.

To answer the original question, I agree that when an individual receives a sentence, that is the term they should serve – I have always been a uncomfortable with someone getting a reduction for ‘good behaviour’ when presumably they are in prison for ‘bad’ behaviour!!!

I wouldn’t support the iea of capital or corporal punishment though – I feel very uncomfortable about using them and them claiming to be a civilised, rather than a barbaric, society.

I also think that prison sentences should be used as a very last resort, and only for very serious crimes. As a previous poster has already said, they merely serve as a ‘university’ of crime, and perpetrate a cycle of criminality rather than end it.

Community based sentences can, and should, be much tougher

However, I think there are bigger issues here. The permissive society has produced a feral underclass that is now in some cases on its 4th or 5th generation, and that lacks the skills to function in the same society as the rest of us and for whom, as a consequence, the judicial system has little impact.

As a previous poster mentioned, society holds together because most people believe in the rule of law. Added to this moral issue are the reprocussions of getting caught – if I were to comit a crime and receive a small fine of just £100 say, the consequences would be huge – I would end up unemployed, lose my house and a very enjoyable life style and so on, and I would suggest that the same would happen for most of the posters on this thread.

However, this isn’t the case for the underclass. Even if they understand what they are doing, the consequences just are not the same. What is needed is a system whereby someone on benefits looses those benefits (they could still receive food vouchers, their utility bills and housing benefit could again be paid direct to their landlord) so that their actions have a long term negative consequence for them.

If we are serious about reducing crime levels, though, we also need to proactively give these individuals the skills that they need to understand their responsibilities, again on the basis that they have no option but to comply.

Because the problems are now inter generational and so ingrained, only tough action will succede, and it isn’t just a judicial problem.

I don’t know if it will ever happen though – not only is it going to be expensive, but it is going to take many years (and many Governments). And the chances of it gaining the support of the Guardian reading classes stikes me as being slight….

One other thing though, about the use of the Parliament Act. I agree with jbritchford on the role of the House of Lords, and how the Act effectively makes them just a revising chamber. In the example given by Lincoln7, the Bill had effectively received large majorities three times in the elected Commons to be thrown out by the unelected Lords.

In such a situation, shouldn’t the will of the Commons take precedence over the Lords, regardless of your personal feelings about both the issue and the personalities behind it?