London Ambulance Service gets into EVs

[dan_b]

https://electricdrives.tv/ev-biz/london ... -vehicles/
.
I guess fully electric ambulances will be a while off yet, but in the meantime they've bought 42 Mach-Es as part of their rapid response fleet. I'm quite impressed by that

[Thebeeman]

Would be better if they spent the millions on a Care Home to clear the backlog in the hospitals and got the existing vehicles out of the queues outside of the A&E.

[marshman]

Would be better if they spent the millions on a Care Home to clear the backlog in the hospitals and got the existing vehicles out of the queues outside of the A&E.

Have to agree but being slightly silly here, at least with the queues they will have plenty of time to charge them

[Krill]

The problem with delayed discharges is due to lack of care staff to provide care at home not care homes (generally bur there is more to it than that).

That is a local authority responsibility (Care Act in England) and is subject to charging arrangements and isn't funded by the NHS.

[Thebeeman]

But it is funded, or not, by Central Gov't. They've cut the budgets to L.A. so much that the system has broken down, then they had all non-vaccinated staff sacked. Combined with Brexit immigration rules we are in a real mess.

[Krill]

I'm not sure I quite get your point, but if an individual (in England) has over £24,000 in assets they fund their own social care (local authority has a duty if requested to arrange but not fund the care) so any changes to LA funding is a non sequitur.

[Mr Gus]

Would be better if they spent the millions on a Care Home to clear the backlog in the hospitals and got the existing vehicles out of the queues outside of the A&E.

Have to agree but being slightly silly here, at least with the queues they will have plenty of time to charge them

We can only imagine the logic of where they stick the chargers MM, ..come on, Govt

[Thebeeman]

I'm not sure I quite get your point, but if an individual (in England) has over £24,000 in assets they fund their own social care (local authority has a duty if requested to arrange but not fund the care) so any changes to LA funding is a non sequitur.

Central Gov't have imposed that financial cut off, previously if you needed care you got it, that's why it was called the NHS. In our situation we have worked and paid our taxes and 'stamp' for 60 years but because we chose not to spend every penny we earned and have only taken 2 foreign holidays in that time and therefore saved for our old age we are not entitled to care until we've depleted our savings.

[NikoV6]

Bet Ford were well happy with that deal! Lost them another $35K a car

[Stinsy]

I'm not sure I quite get your point, but if an individual (in England) has over £24,000 in assets they fund their own social care (local authority has a duty if requested to arrange but not fund the care) so any changes to LA funding is a non sequitur.

Central Gov't have imposed that financial cut off, previously if you needed care you got it, that's why it was called the NHS. In our situation we have worked and paid our taxes and 'stamp' for 60 years but because we chose not to spend every penny we earned and have only taken 2 foreign holidays in that time and therefore saved for our old age we are not entitled to care until we've depleted our savings.

The original basis of the welfare state was that it would be “universal” however over time it has evolved into a dichotomy with people who pay in and people who take out being disparate groups. The lazy and feckless get everything they need for free. The hardworking and prudent get nothing.