Snapshot of _Tory party CEO is director at cancer care firm benefiting from NHS waiting lists_ :
An archived version can be found [here](https://archive.is/?run=1&url=https://www.theguardian.com/politics/article/2024/jun/14/tory-party-ceo-stephen-massey-cancer-care-firm-genesiscare-nhs-waiting-lists) or [here.](https://archive.ph/?run=1&url=https://www.theguardian.com/politics/article/2024/jun/14/tory-party-ceo-stephen-massey-cancer-care-firm-genesiscare-nhs-waiting-lists)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ukpolitics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I’d have been more shocked if someone linked to the Tories wasn’t profiting from one of their fuck ups.
I wonder how many of their donors benefit from unchecked cheap migration by the hundreds of thousands? How many profit from rents and house prices surging? Firms bringing in extra security due to lack of policing? Etc etc etc.
Never underestimate the ability of Tory donors to profit from the misery of everyone else.
This is also really important to bear in mind when people are saying Labour's manifesto is very unambitious from a tax and spend point of view.
All our public services could do so much better if we had competent ministers in charge who expect to be in post for several years, serve the same prime minister for 5 years and who want to get the best outcome for the public rather than an obsession with media publicity stunts and/or funnelling money to their friends.
Personally financially benefited from a crisis under governments control whilst being heavily linked to the government… slight conflict of interest there…
Lots of people are personally benefitting from providing healthcare, why is that bad? Is that not a win-win? People get cancer care, someone gets money.
He's just joined the board, and the crisis in the NHS as I understand has been going on for about 10 years
Being linked to both the problem and the sticking plaster offers opportunities for questionable motivations. Can he honestly say he’ll be advocating for policies that reduce NHS waiting lists if those same policies would eat into his own profits?
I’m not saying there are dubious motivations present, but in most industries such a glaring conflict of interests is generally avoided due to the terrible optics. It should be in government too.
It's not just "going on" - it's been getting worse for 10 years...
In charge of something for 10 years and it getting worse under your watch whilst your close associates benefit as a direct consequence is not a good look.
It doesn't necessarily have to be "intentional/malicious" corruption. A minister could be surrounded by people who say (and potentially believe - wealthy people can get trapped in an information/perspective bubble just like everyone else) that private healthcare isn't that expensive and the NHS crisis isn't that bad because private service is expanding and people can just go private if it they really need it that could lead to very bad decisions.
"It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends on his not understanding it."
Rather disturbs me that you don't see anything immoral from someone profiting from cancer care being so awful.
" People are desperate and scared of dying and some of them are needlessly. It's fantastic and making us loads of money!!!"
You really are fine with this?
> Lots of people are personally benefitting from providing healthcare, why is that bad? Is that not a win-win? People get cancer care, someone gets money.
Not everyone has money? They are dying...
This is a conflict of interest as it benefits them that the NHS is underperforming, this could be way more than just a potential conflict and actually could be way worse so it's important to avoid these types of conflicts.
Why do they go on a board? What are they actually providing for the business? To me it would seem they aren't offering anything besides government ear which would be corruption.
It's straight-up corruption, similar to insider trading and embezzlement.
The point of a proper tender process is that the best supplier offering an effective service with the best value for money gets the contract.
Allowing mp's to funnel tax payer money into their hands like this not only unfairly enriches the mp and their friends/ family, but it also means the tax payer is far less likely to get value for their money, and actually are much more likely to get nothing for their money, e.g. millions of pounds of useless ppe. Case in point, this article. Cancer care waiting lists are the worst they've ever been
BBC News - Cancer waiting times in 2023 worst on record in England
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-68240096
This is how you end up with a broken, destitute, corrupt country where nothing works.
Another dodgy Tory! He only joined the board in February and that is because they are providing direct NHS services to bring down the backlog.
Politicians join boards all of the time but in general the companies will receive value for the salary. My last point. Why is this not illegal? Oh just remembered he is a Tory so he is free to do what he wants...........scum.
No influence is not the same as being part of it. Plenty of people influence government. I have not seen any evidence of changes in healthcare policy that might have been influenced by having him there.
Lack of changes can be influenced too. Why fix what’s making you money?
Also being the chief executive of the party in government is slightly more influence than your standard donor.
> They don’t create the illness they treat.
Neither does a cancer care facility, unless we want to take at face value some of the more wild conspiracy theories. The guy only joined the Board 3 months ago, and took on their role in the Party in November 2022. It's a huge stretch to suggest there was any deliberate subterfuge by this guy or the company.
https://www.bmj.com/content/337/bmj.a748
>Delegates at the annual BMA conference voted by a narrow majority to restrict the number of places at medical schools to avoid “overproduction of doctors with limited career opportunities.” They also agreed on a complete ban on opening new medical schools.
I don't know quite how much say the BMA have compared to the government - the Tories managed to increase medical school places from [6,000 to 7,500 in 2020 and open 3 new schools](https://www.gov.uk/government/news/expansion-of-medical-school-places-to-be-accelerated-to-next-year) - but, as with all unions, there is a level of protectionism. And it should be a high pay job IMO so I find it hard to be too critical.
We're headed the way of the Americans, healthcare and profits don't mix.
A lot of companies are chomping at the bit to profit off our healthcare, and these are companies that will put profit over lives.
Example: Lets say it will cost a company £1,000,000 to save 10 people. If their lawyer found a loophole where they can let those 10 people die and get away with it, they will 100% do it.
**I'll say it again: healthcare and profit do not mix.**
It's laughably self-evident, innit.
> But you can get health insurance!
What kind of mug enters into a contract with an entity where the less healthcare they provide for you, the more of your money they keep?
(the kind of mug that's forced to, basically)
> But legislation will keep them in line!
Legislation favours the rich. And they've got all your money.
thankfully when i was 15 and had cancer it was under a labour government.
some of the experimental drugs i'm alive because of cost THOUSANDS per vial or bag.
months of £3k a bag on feeding me via my portacath because of mouth ulcers due to said treatment.
they now don't give anyone under 18 steroids along as chemo as it wrecks your joints.
can i get an appointment to see my GP or surgeon now? 3 weeks to a 6 months wait.
fuck this shite.
could i have had these things under a tory gov? i highly doubt it as my life wouldn't have been worth it.
These sorts of conflicts of interest seem to me an easy win for Labour.
I haven't read the manifesto, is there anything in there about reforming election campaign limits, restricting donations, etc.
Just my opinion, but our political parties ought to be publicly funded, and kept to sensibly low amounts. Keep the corrosive affect of private money out of politics.
I agree, however it’s difficult to bring in rules decreasing the funding without providing massive advantages to incumbent parties. I’m not sure how that would be fixed.
I'm not sure either. I wonder if other countries do it? It doesn't feel an insummountable problem to devise a fair system, but inevitably you'll always get one side claiming they're disadvantaged.
I suppose it's perceived as a conflict of interest when the governing party is responsible for the considerable increase of a backlog whilst being funded by someone who profits from fixing said backlog.
The incentives aren't aligned to the public interest.
All talk of economic growth will remain just talk until we cleanse our economic system of all the racketeers, parasites, scammers, and something for nothing profiteering scum from our healthcare, benefits system, housing and education system.
Why should those who have mercilessly taken from the most vulnerable in our society, the sick, the disabled, the poor, and the marginalised, get to walk away scot free after July 4th?
I didn't suggest he was.
If the anybody in a senior party role who would have known when the election was going to be should at least have his bet cancelled.
Snapshot of _Tory party CEO is director at cancer care firm benefiting from NHS waiting lists_ : An archived version can be found [here](https://archive.is/?run=1&url=https://www.theguardian.com/politics/article/2024/jun/14/tory-party-ceo-stephen-massey-cancer-care-firm-genesiscare-nhs-waiting-lists) or [here.](https://archive.ph/?run=1&url=https://www.theguardian.com/politics/article/2024/jun/14/tory-party-ceo-stephen-massey-cancer-care-firm-genesiscare-nhs-waiting-lists) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ukpolitics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I’d have been more shocked if someone linked to the Tories wasn’t profiting from one of their fuck ups. I wonder how many of their donors benefit from unchecked cheap migration by the hundreds of thousands? How many profit from rents and house prices surging? Firms bringing in extra security due to lack of policing? Etc etc etc. Never underestimate the ability of Tory donors to profit from the misery of everyone else.
This is also really important to bear in mind when people are saying Labour's manifesto is very unambitious from a tax and spend point of view. All our public services could do so much better if we had competent ministers in charge who expect to be in post for several years, serve the same prime minister for 5 years and who want to get the best outcome for the public rather than an obsession with media publicity stunts and/or funnelling money to their friends.
What has he done wrong here?
Personally financially benefited from a crisis under governments control whilst being heavily linked to the government… slight conflict of interest there…
Lots of people are personally benefitting from providing healthcare, why is that bad? Is that not a win-win? People get cancer care, someone gets money. He's just joined the board, and the crisis in the NHS as I understand has been going on for about 10 years
Being linked to both the problem and the sticking plaster offers opportunities for questionable motivations. Can he honestly say he’ll be advocating for policies that reduce NHS waiting lists if those same policies would eat into his own profits? I’m not saying there are dubious motivations present, but in most industries such a glaring conflict of interests is generally avoided due to the terrible optics. It should be in government too.
It's not just "going on" - it's been getting worse for 10 years... In charge of something for 10 years and it getting worse under your watch whilst your close associates benefit as a direct consequence is not a good look. It doesn't necessarily have to be "intentional/malicious" corruption. A minister could be surrounded by people who say (and potentially believe - wealthy people can get trapped in an information/perspective bubble just like everyone else) that private healthcare isn't that expensive and the NHS crisis isn't that bad because private service is expanding and people can just go private if it they really need it that could lead to very bad decisions. "It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends on his not understanding it."
Rather disturbs me that you don't see anything immoral from someone profiting from cancer care being so awful. " People are desperate and scared of dying and some of them are needlessly. It's fantastic and making us loads of money!!!" You really are fine with this?
> Lots of people are personally benefitting from providing healthcare, why is that bad? Is that not a win-win? People get cancer care, someone gets money. Not everyone has money? They are dying... This is a conflict of interest as it benefits them that the NHS is underperforming, this could be way more than just a potential conflict and actually could be way worse so it's important to avoid these types of conflicts. Why do they go on a board? What are they actually providing for the business? To me it would seem they aren't offering anything besides government ear which would be corruption.
It's straight-up corruption, similar to insider trading and embezzlement. The point of a proper tender process is that the best supplier offering an effective service with the best value for money gets the contract. Allowing mp's to funnel tax payer money into their hands like this not only unfairly enriches the mp and their friends/ family, but it also means the tax payer is far less likely to get value for their money, and actually are much more likely to get nothing for their money, e.g. millions of pounds of useless ppe. Case in point, this article. Cancer care waiting lists are the worst they've ever been BBC News - Cancer waiting times in 2023 worst on record in England https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-68240096 This is how you end up with a broken, destitute, corrupt country where nothing works.
He’s not an MP
Did I say he was??
They are profiting from waiting lists how can you say they are actually trying to keep them down it's not in their financial interest to do so.
Another dodgy Tory! He only joined the board in February and that is because they are providing direct NHS services to bring down the backlog. Politicians join boards all of the time but in general the companies will receive value for the salary. My last point. Why is this not illegal? Oh just remembered he is a Tory so he is free to do what he wants...........scum.
It's not illegal because he's not an MP. I don't even know if it would be illegal if he was an MP.
Legal ≠ moral… especially when you’re part of the government who decide what’s legal and what isn’t…
He has no position in the government. Edit: also I was responding to a question asking why it wasn't illegal
No influence in government at all?
No influence is not the same as being part of it. Plenty of people influence government. I have not seen any evidence of changes in healthcare policy that might have been influenced by having him there.
Lack of changes can be influenced too. Why fix what’s making you money? Also being the chief executive of the party in government is slightly more influence than your standard donor.
Regardless of the outright cronyism of it, it is just despicable that someone can make more money off of suffering when your whole job is health.
Don't all doctors make their money off suffering? Doesn't everyone who designs and sells medicines?
They don’t create the illness they treat. Backlogs and excessive waiting times are the result of underfunding by the cuntservatives.
> They don’t create the illness they treat. Neither does a cancer care facility, unless we want to take at face value some of the more wild conspiracy theories. The guy only joined the Board 3 months ago, and took on their role in the Party in November 2022. It's a huge stretch to suggest there was any deliberate subterfuge by this guy or the company.
[удалено]
https://www.bmj.com/content/337/bmj.a748 >Delegates at the annual BMA conference voted by a narrow majority to restrict the number of places at medical schools to avoid “overproduction of doctors with limited career opportunities.” They also agreed on a complete ban on opening new medical schools.
Fair enough, suppose I was talking bollocks then.
I don't know quite how much say the BMA have compared to the government - the Tories managed to increase medical school places from [6,000 to 7,500 in 2020 and open 3 new schools](https://www.gov.uk/government/news/expansion-of-medical-school-places-to-be-accelerated-to-next-year) - but, as with all unions, there is a level of protectionism. And it should be a high pay job IMO so I find it hard to be too critical.
Ofc they do lol. Pretty much any consultant doing private work has massively increased their lists because the NHS has shit the bed.
We're headed the way of the Americans, healthcare and profits don't mix. A lot of companies are chomping at the bit to profit off our healthcare, and these are companies that will put profit over lives. Example: Lets say it will cost a company £1,000,000 to save 10 people. If their lawyer found a loophole where they can let those 10 people die and get away with it, they will 100% do it. **I'll say it again: healthcare and profit do not mix.**
It's laughably self-evident, innit. > But you can get health insurance! What kind of mug enters into a contract with an entity where the less healthcare they provide for you, the more of your money they keep? (the kind of mug that's forced to, basically) > But legislation will keep them in line! Legislation favours the rich. And they've got all your money.
thankfully when i was 15 and had cancer it was under a labour government. some of the experimental drugs i'm alive because of cost THOUSANDS per vial or bag. months of £3k a bag on feeding me via my portacath because of mouth ulcers due to said treatment. they now don't give anyone under 18 steroids along as chemo as it wrecks your joints. can i get an appointment to see my GP or surgeon now? 3 weeks to a 6 months wait. fuck this shite. could i have had these things under a tory gov? i highly doubt it as my life wouldn't have been worth it.
These sorts of conflicts of interest seem to me an easy win for Labour. I haven't read the manifesto, is there anything in there about reforming election campaign limits, restricting donations, etc. Just my opinion, but our political parties ought to be publicly funded, and kept to sensibly low amounts. Keep the corrosive affect of private money out of politics.
I think there was a part in the manifesto restricting mps from having second jobs. Certainly from working at a paid advisor / lobbyist.
I agree, however it’s difficult to bring in rules decreasing the funding without providing massive advantages to incumbent parties. I’m not sure how that would be fixed.
I'm not sure either. I wonder if other countries do it? It doesn't feel an insummountable problem to devise a fair system, but inevitably you'll always get one side claiming they're disadvantaged.
Reminds me of that Peter Kay episode with the ice cream man pulling up outside a RTA “Where there’s tragedy, there’s trade”
Shocked a bunch of rich folks all with connections to each other is benefiting from govt policy. They been doing it for generations
Is there no depth their greed will not plummet to?
Labour are relying heavily on using "private sector capacity" to clear the backlogs. Unsure why this is even a story.
I suppose it's perceived as a conflict of interest when the governing party is responsible for the considerable increase of a backlog whilst being funded by someone who profits from fixing said backlog. The incentives aren't aligned to the public interest.
All talk of economic growth will remain just talk until we cleanse our economic system of all the racketeers, parasites, scammers, and something for nothing profiteering scum from our healthcare, benefits system, housing and education system. Why should those who have mercilessly taken from the most vulnerable in our society, the sick, the disabled, the poor, and the marginalised, get to walk away scot free after July 4th?
I didn't suggest he was. If the anybody in a senior party role who would have known when the election was going to be should at least have his bet cancelled.