7 ms·

How many people in the NHS could have kept their jobs last year with that £4 million do you think?

• axod 17y ago
  It's probably more useful to look at real scandalous waste, like the computer system: "Delays to NHS computer system could cost taxpayers £40bn" I'm not saying the £4m isn't important, but it's not massive compared to their budget. They could likely have cut down on using temp staff, and saved that £4m easily enough.
  • Roridge 17y ago
    That is very true, but just another in a long line of the NHS and it's wasted money.
    • axod 17y ago
      Come on. The NHS is one of the best things the UK has. We pay far less for our healthcare than the US, and enjoy longer life. It's not all bad. Any large system has wastage, it's just a part of being big.
      • Roridge 17y ago
        I can't see your original comment above, but I am sure you were talking about why they had put 'wasted' in quotes, and that you felt homoeopathic medicine was a waste of time, so your last comment is quite off topic. However, while it may be debatable the NHS is one of the best things the UK has (I can introduce you to many NHS workers who disagree) that be it £4million or £40 billion wasted, wasted is wasted, and that's why the BBC article put it in quotes. Because any wasted money in a government organisation costs jobs.
  • deleted 17y ago
    [deleted]