IF the pharmacist pilot plan to help GPs succeeds, any chance Fenwick gets its recently closed GP surgery back (Pharmacist pilot plan to help GPs, The National, January 30)?
I jest, of course. We were told a surgery at Fenwick was no longer sustainable due to the failure of repeated recruitment efforts on account of a lack of trained GPS, pressure of work, unrealistic patient expectations and loss of dispensing income with the prospect of a pharmacy opening in the village.
We were also told that a debate is required about models for delivering health care in future. Any such model may not include GP surgeries. Any suggestions to keep the surgery open we were assured were not viable. A brave new world it is then, of telephone and video consultations.
The loss of the GP surgery demonstrates how powerless the community is in seeking to retain this service given current circumstances. I have every sympathy for GPs working extended hours to keep their practices operating. They should not have to do so for a number of reasons. They are not alone however. In this 24/7 world, email, key performance indicators and targets dictate that many, sadly, are obliged to work extended and unsocial hours to earn a living.
All this is without addressing the nature and time scale of the consultation over the closure of the GP surgery and the input of the local health board and health council in this affair. It would be interesting to learn the experiences of any other communities affected by the loss of a GP Surgery. It was suggested that other communities were experiencing the same problems with the provision of GP services. I was told by one economist the problem is simply that there is no money after the credit crunch/financial crisis.
Fenwick, of course has a Conservative as one of our representatives on the local council. Perhaps we should then lobby him to organise a private medical service in the village. I would not have thought he takes The National. At least he was present at the community council meeting to discuss the closure. None of our other elected representatives were there. He and the community council however seemed surprised to hear from the health board representatives present that the meeting, organised I understood by the community council, was part of the consultation process.
Melvyn Gibson
Fenwick, East Ayrshire
APOLOGISTS for the international embarrassment of Theresa May’s sycophantic toadying up to the buffoon with his finger on the nuclear button always justify their craven conduct by claiming that we have to remember that America is our most important ally.
Now, traditionally an ally is a country that is united with another in war. What particular war are we engaged in at present that America is supporting? Who is the enemy, and when was this war declared? We should be told.
And if we are subliminally harping back to WWII, why should Russia not also be referred to as our ally, since Russian endurance at Stalingrad halted the Nazi war machine and led to victory. As Winston Churchill said: “The Red Army tore the guts out of the Wehrmacht”?
Or are some things to be remembered officially and others not?
Brian Quail
Glasgow
NICOLA Sturgeon is correct to threaten May with indyref2 (Sturgeon hints she may set indyref2 date by end of March, The National, January 31). Do we really want to be a backwater country bossed about forever by idiots at Westmonster? All their heckling and arrogant attitude towards Scotland is a disgrace. I don’t want us faced with crippling austerity from a Tory Party we don’t vote for but Dugdale is happy with it. We have two years to win over the Scottish people: do they want us to be part of a Union cut off from the rest of the world and having Trump calling the shots, or do we want to follow other smaller nations like Norway, Iceland, Sweden and Ireland?
Scotland would keep our £50 billion of UK trade money each year and over £12bn to the EU. Just think how well our education, NHS, policing etc would be with £62bn or more at our disposal.
Stephen Kelly
Motherwell
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here