Sex, drugs and rock and roll
Sunday, October 15, 2006
Well not quite drugs. But you do wonder if there is anything that co-ops can't do.
First there was the prostitutes' co-operatives that reduced HIV rates among prostitutes. Then a pub is saved as a co-operative for its local community.
Co-ops for drinking and sex work. So it's no surprise that mutual solutions can be found for gambling too. There are rumours that the government is looking kindly on the proposal for an employee-owned buyout for the Tote. According to the Racing Post, "a team led by chief executive Trevor Beaumont, and endorsed by several current board members, has been working on a plan to set up an employee trust that would take over the Tote in its entirety.
"They have been using the high-street empire run by the John Lewis Partnership, which involves all employees having a stake in the company's annual performance, as a model."
So that's gambling on top of drinking and illegal sex. Makes you think if anyone's thought of co-operative healthcare. Now where did I put my foundation trust membership form...
Labels: co-operatives, leisure
6 Comments:
I'm not sure how the founders of the Co-operative Movement would responded to having the creeping marketisation of the NHS described as "co-operative health care".
commented by 
Harry Perkins, 11:03 AM
Harry Perkins, 11:03 AM
Well, there is more than one thing going on in the NHS. I can't be sure, but maybe the pioneers would approve of doctors' co-ops running out of hours services, the societies having a major stake in the pharmacy business and the small but growing number of staff and user co-ops for care homes. They might find foundation trusts trickier to deal with, but I'd be happy to tell them that my local South London & Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust is making a great effort to democratically use the opportunity to involve patients, staff and the local community more in running the services we all care about.
The problem with the current health policy isn't the Foundation Trusts bit - I hope we all agree with involving people in public services provision.
The problem is with the seperation of purchasers and providers, and "payment by results", or internal market with knobs on.
Why would local people care about having control over their local hospital, when all the power is in the hands of the PCT, and that hospital is seen as one amongst many in a competitive market?
Anyway, like the blog keep it up.
Sam
http://cambridgeco-operation.blogspot.com
The problem is with the seperation of purchasers and providers, and "payment by results", or internal market with knobs on.
Why would local people care about having control over their local hospital, when all the power is in the hands of the PCT, and that hospital is seen as one amongst many in a competitive market?
Anyway, like the blog keep it up.
Sam
http://cambridgeco-operation.blogspot.com
P.S How about a link to my Co-operation blog?
Link added!
Cheers!
