SOHS North Devon Save Our Hospital Services www.SOHS.org.uk Page 4

I keep six honest serving men

(they taught me all I knew);

Their names are What and Why

and When

and How and Where and Who.

Rudyard Kipling offered us "six

honest serving men". Perhaps

they would serve us well when we

look at the proposed and soon-to-

be-implemented changes to the

National Health Service. Some of

them seem to be easy to answer.

The mechanics of the changes,

the what, when and where are

still under discussion. Of course,

even in this there is smoke and

mirrors, but we will come onto

this later. We do have mountains

of paper and reports going

through possible and probable

changes. The how is not so clear.

The who ought to be clear, butnothing in this is as clear as it

ought to be.

That brings

us to the

why, and

that seems to

me to be the

golden key,

which un-

locks the

door to

understand-

ing.

That

things should

be clearer: or

to use a

modern

phrase, more transparent is,

ahem, clear. Ah, but sometimes

there are valid reasons for

obfuscation. I will give an

example: during World War 2 it

became necessary to create the

illusion that British forces would

land at entirely different locations

to the real one. Operation

Fortitude was created to effect

this, and to do this they created

two decoy locations and equipped

them with fake, but realistic

airplanes, buildings, landing craft

and troops. Other tactics were

also used, which we won't go into,

but the deception worked: the

enemy was looking in the wrong

place and left ill-prepared. So it

behoves The Powers That Be

(TPTB) to create the deception in

the hopes that the valiant

warriors of SOHS and similar

organisations would be misled

and direct our strategy in the

wrong direction.

So let us address the "who" of

our fight. I have named them

TPTB for the same reason that

the mathematician deploys x: the

unknown quantity. Ostensibly our

fight appears to be with the

Success Regime, as they are the

face of the campaign. But if we

turn too much attention to them,

we are missing the real enemy.

The Success Regime is working

under

orders.

They

are, in

essence,

Civil

Servants.

They

equate

to the

soldiers

involved

in the

war.

The

soldiers

may be lobbing the bombs, but

they do as they are told by others.

A platoon of soldiers in isolation

is not - cannot - be said to be

responsible for the war, although

to defeat the enemy there may

have to be some combat. The

Success Regime work for the

NHS. So are they TPTB? There

are those that would like us to

think so. "It is not our plan, it is

entirely that of the NHS." Beware

of such weasel words, for they

serve one purpose and one

alone, to muddy the waters. The

NHS is not independent in its own

right, nor does it have the power

to pass legislation. Once again,

remember that they too are Civil

Servants, and their salaries are

paid from the public purse. That

brings us to their masters, the

government. Are they The Powers

That Be? I will leave you to make

up your own mind. Of course

some have blamed this party, or

that party, this politician or that

politician. Again, you must judge

the rectitude of such claims. You

might need to read on to help in

forming an opinion.

I want to return to smoke and

mirrors. I have already briefly

referred to Operation Fortitude.

Such an honourable title could

not be used for this operation

which I shall term Operation

Treachery. This addresses the

"how" of our list. As with

Fortitude, Treachery is a stealth

operation. What appears-to-be on

the surface is not the reason. The

Success Regime offer us the

premise that the changes are

needed because the population

are living longer and there are

more elderly people. This is

Ageist. In effect it is saying it is

the old people's fault. If the

blame were targeted against an

ethnic group, or a group with a

particular sexual orientation,

there would be a huge outcry of,

"foul!" Apparently it is socially

acceptable to blame older

people. The first thing we must

observe is that the statement is

not true. It is a deception

designed to mislead. The less-

thinking person will nod their

head sagely, and say, "Those

annoying elderly people…" This

statement is a decoy, but even if

it were true it would not stand up.

Who are these awful ageing

The National Wealth Service

A comment on proposed changes to health services

Not what it seems: this is a fake tank used in

Operation Fortitude. It is inflatable.

people? Why they are the very

people who paid into the health

service for years. The very reason

they and generations to come are

living longer is because these

"old people" invested in the NHS

when they were younger. They

thought it was necessary, and

they wanted to provide for the

future. The increased number of

elderly people is no sudden

shock. They have not suddenly

materialised at the age of 65. No,

they have been there, steadily

investing in the infrastructure of

the Health Service, not just for

their own good, but also for the

benefit of those who have never

contributed a single penny to

their care. I'll give you another

example of deception. A

consultative document from the

NHS asks the question: which

would your prefer, 24 beds at

Sidmouth or 24 beds at Seaton?

How about 24 beds at both?: that

question is not asked. The

statement appears to be the very

epitome of generosity in offering

the public a choice: how very

reasonable. It will deceive many,

who do not see that this is

designed to pit the people of

Sidmouth against the people of

Seaton for the 24 beds on offer,

whereas the real fight is to save

all 48. Deception!

Divide and conquer has always

been a tactic used by leaders to

get their own way, but there are

other strategies in the armoury of

TPTB. I have already mentioned

one: stealth. When an opponent

is not wary it becomes easy for

their adversary to sneak

something through. Much of this

process has already been

conducted in secrecy. The public

is largely unaware of plans to sell

off hospitals and public-owned

land. Some of these are

"treasured family possessions"

left in trust by the

goodness of our

forbears. Talk

about selling off

the family silver!

The last time such

an awful raid on

the nation’s

wealth was

undertaken was in

the days of Dr

Beeching, who

robbed us of

hundreds of miles

of useful and

beautiful railway

lines, scrapped and sold off

historic buildings, and deprived

people of their jobs. Those

railways could have kept lorries

off the road.

What other weapons lie in the

armoury? I would venture to

suggest sycophants and

sympathisers or, in other words,

bought-people. It is a well-used

tactic to put in infiltrators who are

not what they seem. These

people are planted in key

positions so that when

the time comes they

will do the bidding

of their lords and

masters. When the

job is done, they

receive a

knighthood or a

large financial

reward. They

employ soothing

words and empty

promises to lull us

into a sense of

security. They love

incomprehensible jargon

(obfuscation) and nice sounding

mantras. Take the phrase "care in

the community". It sounds good,

doesn't it? Who wouldn't want

someone to come to their home

and look after them when they

have need? So you repeat it and

repeat it to make sure it becomes

a buzz phrase that slips off

people's tongues. Nobody then

bothers to ask whether it will

work. Nobody bothers to ask

whether the commercial

providers can do the job. So

TPTB press on with setting up

contracts with commercial

providers ready for the day. They

are already signed up and in

place - ah you didn't know that

did you! Stealth! Did such

commercial providers work

properly for the train services

(standing room only) or the

prison services (now where did

that prisoner go?)? Then we

come to a final tactic. Wear

people down. Did you know that

staff in hospitals, and other parts

of the health services, are being

placed on short contracts? No?

Stealth again! The purpose is to

make them insecure so they get

up and take another job or retire.

If they do stay on, they are given

more and more work until they

give up. Some doctors and

nurses are already at breaking

point. If they go, their contract is

taken over by—you've guessed it,

a commercial firm.

The stealth, subterfuge and

cunning being employed is

beyond sickening. There is

evil at work here. And

that brings us to the

final question,

why? The simple

answer is

money. Ah, I

hear you say;

didn't I claim

earlier that they

were not doing it

to save money?

Correct. They are

doing it to make

money.

But surely it is

true that we must

save money because the health

service does not have enough to

provide health care for everyone?

Rubbish! The reason the health

service is short of funds is

because the government is not

allocating sufficient funds to it.

The question needs to be asked

SOHS North Devon Save Our Hospital Services www.SOHS.org.uk Page 5

why the UK spends less on health

care (based on %age GDP) than

the rest of Europe, than Canada,

New Zealand, United States. Less

even than Cuba, Sierra Leone or

Moldova. We are one of the

leading nations of the world for

goodness sake and we fund third

world healthcare. So how could

the shortfall be made up? The

shortfall is estimated to have

increased to 16 billion pounds by

2020. By contrast we give over 12

billion away on foreign aid. Then

there are firms that don't pay tax.

Nobody even knows the shortfall

for that as Inland Revenue can't

seem to do the sums. There is

also the incalculable contribution

that it is claimed migrants will

make to the economy. And I

haven't even mentioned the 14

billion pounds we send to the EU

every year (based on House of

Commons briefing 2016). I'm not

an economist or a politician, so

my grasp of these things may be

poor. But I can see this: the

SOHS North Devon Save Our Hospital Services www.SOHS.org.uk Page 6

reason TPTB are not trying to

increase the budget is not

because they can't, but because

they won't. I can also see that

anyone with common sense

should be able to see that doing

something yourself has to be

cheaper than employing a

commercial firm to do it.

So who profits? Not the

patient. Some will pay for the

changes with their life, others will

pay with increased and

unnecessary suffering. Not the

National Health Service which will

all but be destroyed. I wonder.

Could it be those private health

companies that are being given

lucrative contracts, and the big

pharmaceutical firms that will

profit from people who

desperately buy more useless

pills to try to treat their sickness

themselves? These are firms that

MPs are rushing to invest in, or

they get paid by the businesses

for consultancy services. This is

where the money-trail leads.

These are the people who will

really benefit, and in my opinion

is the answer to the question,

why?

People of previous generations

gave handsomely and worked

tirelessly to create a National

Health Service that was the envy

of the world. It is tragic that the

naked greed of a modern

generation is going to virtually

destroy it.

I started this article with six

honest men that served us. As I

examine the evidence of the

health reforms I find, unless there

is immediate change, I must end

with an unspecified number of

dishonest men who serve only

themselves.

The views expressed in this

article are the opinion of the

writer and may not express the

views of SOHS.

Stephen Clark