Rqli Professional detachment or just uncaring
The cost of repairing crumbling NHS buildings in England has soared to almost 拢14bn, prompting warnings that patients and staff are at risk from falling roofs and faulty equipment.The repair bill faced by the health service to make its estate fit for purpose has more than trebled from 拢4.5bn in 2012-13 to 拢13.8bn last year, according to NHS England data.The latest bill means that, for the first time since records began, it would cost the NHS more to eradicate its maintenance backlog than the 拢13.6bn it spends on running it
stanley cup spain s entire estate.Graph showing rising cost of NHS maintenanceThe figures show that the health services infrastructure fell into a state of serious disrepair as it was starved of capital funding while the Conservatives were in power, NHS officials said. Vital bits of the NHS are literall
stanley water bottle y falling apart after years of underinvestment nationally. The safety of patients and staff is at risk, said Saffron Cordery, the deputy chief executive of NHS
stanley becher Providers. The list of essential repairs across the NHS waiting to be done keeps getting longer and the costs are rocketing. Eye-watering sums are needed just to patch up buildings and equipment which are in a very bad way right across hospitals, mental health, community health and ambulance services. British BAME and foreign doctors suffer discrimination throughout careersRead moreNHS England has classed 拢2.7bn of those repairs as high risk 鈥?up from 拢2.4bn a year before 鈥?because they pose an ongoing danger to peo Mfqi IVF study finds success rate lower in men over 51 than under 35
Last week, with the wider world preoccupied with matters of death and survival, the appeal court addressed the unfairness of the governments hostile environment right to rent scheme. The high court last year ruled the scheme 鈥?which obliges private la
stanley quencher ndlords to check the immigrati
stanley kubek on status of tenants and prospective tenants, with the risk of five years in prison if they get it wrong 鈥?to be racially discriminatory.Whatever its intention, what the law did in practice was encourage many landlords to withhold places to live from anyone who carried the potential for trouble under the act. The high court had ruled the measure unfair, saying it had little to no effect on controlling immigration and that it flew in the face of human rights laws guaranteeing freedom from discrimination. That seemed sensible.Enter the appeal court, considering a cry of foul from a government that talks of the hostile environment as if it were a relic of the past while simultaneously keeping its strictures in place. The appeal court accepted that, under this law, some landlords did indeed discriminate against w
stanley espana ould-be tenants who had no British passport 鈥?as is the case with 17% of British nationals in England and Wales. That in itself was a victory for those such as the Joint Council for the Welfare of Immigrants JCWI who opposed the scheme. But the appeal court judges dismissed the view of the high court and ruled the scheme, for all its problems, justified and proportionate . They used lega
