"charles" wrote in message ...

In article ,
Steve Walker wrote:
On 12/02/2016 08:41, harry wrote:
On Thursday, 11 February 2016 10:33:48 UTC, Brian Gaff wrote:
Surely they should prioritise the worst cases no mater what the
residential status of the person though.




Well, do some research & let us all know what you discover.

The trouble is (certainly here) that the NHS has to pay £500 for 3 hours
of a translators time - even if only a few minutes are required - and
then per hour after that. I can understand making sure that if one is
needed, they are fed a constant stream of patients to make the best use
of their time. I'd be pretty ****ed off if I was a local stuck behind
them though.

SteveW

Why don't the NHS have interpreters on their staff?

That would be a tad expensive to cover all languages.
Why not use vets for those unable to speak the language? Vets seem to do a
wonderful job with their patients, none of which actually talk any language.