Andrew Lansley and the Con-Dems to wash their hands of the NHS.
Conservative election poster 2010
A few recent news articles about the UK’s Conservative and Liberal-Democrat coalition government – the ConDem’s – brutal attack on the National Health Service.
This will ‘severely curtail’ the health secretary’s ability to influence the delivery of NHS care and to ensure everyone receives the best healthcare possible, it warned.
It said: ‘The Bill will make it impossible for the secretary of state to direct that certain services are available and difficult for the secretary of state to step in if these groups deliver poor healthcare to the local community.’
…
More than three quarters of the 1,000 ministerial amendments to the government’s flagship NHS bill involve changing the name of the new GP bodies to purchase treatment on behalf of the patients, it emerged on Tuesday.
Until this summer, the government had been pushing the idea that family doctors would form “consortia” to buy care. However, David Cameron’s team of experts, the Future Forum, advocated a name change since “consortia” gave the impression that GPs would be too powerful in the coalition’s new look NHS.
Instead GP consortia are to be called “clinical commissioning groups” and will have governing bodies with at least one nurse and one specialist doctor.
The result, say critics, is a bureaucratic nightmare with a slew of meaningless amendments which could obscure some potentially disastrous changes to the NHS bill, already the longest and most complex in the NHS’s history. MPs are to vote on the final report stage in the Commons next week.
Since the government only allowed two weeks to vote on the new bill earlier this summer, many say detailed scrutiny will be needed in the Lords to unearth the full implications for patients. Labour believe only one in 10 changes will be “new” amendments.
…
(Scotland) The NHS workforce shrunk by more than 1500 in three months, with further reductions expected over the year, according to new figures.
Health Secretary Nicola Sturgeon said any reduction, particularly involving nursing staff, will cause concern but good progress was being made to cut the number of high-earning managers.
The number of staff fell by 1589 to 155,312 between June and March, equal to 1%. The number of nursing and midwifery staff decreased by 569 to 65,856.
The SNP’s political opponents said the figures show cuts to nurses despite election pledges to protect health spending.
…
The current health and social care bill talks about ‘liberating provision of NHS services’ – Tory code for allowing the market into the much-loved public service.
PCS’s policy-making annual conferences have regularly voted in support of the NHS and against privatisation – so the union urges members to take action to support the campaign against the bill.
The Trades Union Congress – the umbrella body for British unions – has set up a web page called All Together for the NHS.
MPs are bracing for another onslaught of emails as online activist group 38 degrees launches its latest campaign, this time targeting the government’s controversial NHS reform proposals.
The group say despite changes to the Health and Social Care Bill the NHS could still be subject to European competition laws, following the advice of two lawyers.
38 Degrees say the advice shows “private health companies will be able to take new NHS commissioning groups to court if they don’t win contracts”.
They also claim Andrew Lansley will no longer have a legal duty to provide a health service. “We can expect increases in postcode lotteries – and less ways to hold the government to account if the service deteriorates.”
Now they are urging their supporters to email their MP – particularly if they will be supporting the health and social care bill.
…
Pressure Group 38degrees commissioned legal advice on the Liberal-Democrat – CONservative government’s Destroy the NHS Bill.
The legal advice confirms that the Bill will remove the duty on the Health Secretary to be responsible for providing a health service and that the NHS will be subject to competition law which, in turn, will promote private interests.
The proposed cut in legal aid to patients will cost the NHS very dearly.
CONservative Prime Minister David Cameron claims that “the whole health profession is on board for what is now being done”. It’s a deliberately misleading statement since much of the medical profession actively oppose his plans to destroy the NHS.
Conservative election poster 2010
A few recent news articles about the UK’s Conservative and Liberal-Democrat coalition government – the ConDem’s – brutal attack on the National Health Service.
Legal opinion funded by campaigners suggests ‘hands-off’ clause will remove the health secretary’s accountability
The health secretary will be able to “wash his hands” of the NHS after forthcoming legislation which will take away his duty to provide a national health service, according to legal advice funded by campaigners.
The legal opinion, commissioned and paid for by members of the 38 Degrees website, justifies the widespread public concern about the government’s health reforms, in spite of Andrew Lansley‘s assurances that he has listened and responded to criticisms, they say.
The independent legal team says the health and social reform bill removes the health secretary’s responsibility for NHS provision through a “hands-off” clause designed to give autonomy to commissioning groups.
The Health Secretary’s promise to prevent price competition in the NHS as part of the Government’s health reforms is meaningless and could be challenged in the courts, senior lawyers have warned.
Under the reformed Health and Social Care Bill, being put through Parliament by Andrew Lansley, regulators will no longer have a duty to promote price competition between public and private health providers.
But yesterday lawyers suggested that the concession would have no practical effect as EU competition and procurement law will force trusts to consider the price and value of services when commissioning or face challenges in the courts.
This could lead to significant fines or the cancelling of contracts – with a knock-on effect on patient care – if challenged by companies that lose out on contracts. It will also, the advice suggests, cost the new GP consortiums, set up to replace primary care trusts, millions of pounds in lawyers’ fees to ensure that their commissioning decisions are legally sustainable.
“The Government has simply failed to grapple with the frontline issues in procurement [and] has wholly underestimated the increasing rather than diminishing complexity in the area and has had no or perhaps little regard to the administrative and financial burdens arising from the regime,” the legal opinion concludes.
“The fact, however, that the Government has amended the Bill to remove… the duty to promote competition as an end in itself is arguably futile since the very fact that domestic and European competition law applies to the NHS arguably itself results in the promotion of competition since that is its aim.”
The opinion was commissioned by the campaign group 38 Degrees from lawyers at the Doughty Street and Monckton Chambers. It will be passed on to MPs debating the Bill, which is currently going through the House of Commons.
Its conclusions are likely to concern senior Liberal Democrats ahead of the party’s conference next month – as the removal of the competition clause was trumpeted by the party as a key concession won from the Conservatives.
Any suggestion that it is meaningless will anger activists and lead to calls for further reform to the legislation.
The report also concludes that if the Bill becomes law the duty of the Government to provide a “national” health service will have been diluted and it will reduce what is currently the “unfettered power” of the Health Secretary to impose his or her will on the NHS.
The legal advice adds that in the “clear intention of the Bill to give consortia autonomy from the Secretary of State, there is a real risk of an increase in the ‘postcode lottery’ nature of the delivery of some services, depending on the decisions made by consortia in relation to these subsections. And the intention of the Bill is that there will be very little that the Secretary of State can do about this in practice.”
…
The Government’s plans to slash the soaring legal aid bill threaten to cost the NHS millions and exclude many victims of medical negligence from justice, the National Health Service’s own lawyers have warned.
The man in charge of managing an NHS negligence bill that last year topped £1bn for the first time, told the Justice Secretary, Kenneth Clarke, that his attempts to stop the state bankrolling medical cases would be counterproductive – and would “undoubtedly cause NHS legal costs to escalate massively”.
Steve Walker, chief executive of the NHS Litigation Authority (NHSLA), cautioned that the move would push alleged victims into the arms of lawyers offering “no win, no fee” deals, which would leave hospitals with hugely inflated bills every time they lost a case. The deals, also known as conditional fee agreements (CFAs), have been on the increase in recent years, with payments to claimant lawyers amounting to 76 per cent of the £257m outlay on legal costs for clinical negligence claims closed last year.
Mr Walker also suggested the move would lead to a conflict of interest between lawyers and clients seeking a fair settlement – amounting to “a danger that some very seriously injured and vulnerable claimants may be prejudiced by the desire of their lawyers to recover their costs”. Claimants in some of the most serious cases, including brain-damaged children and adults, could struggle to strike suitable CFAs – and face prohibitive charges including hefty “after the event” insurance premiums.
But the warnings, delivered in an official response to the Ministry of Justice, appear to have made little difference to the final Bill, which will be debated in Parliament when MPs return next month.
Pressure groups and the legal profession last night said the NHSLA’s comments revealed officials’ deep concerns over the dangers posed by Mr Clarke’s proposals, and they condemned his failure to amend the Bill to take account of the warnings.
Peter Walsh, of the charity Action against Medical Accidents, said: “All that will happen here is that Ken Clarke will be able to say he has saved a few millions on the legal aid budget, but elsewhere in Whitehall the NHS will be paying tens of millions more. At the same time, dozens of people will be excluded from justice and the NHS will not be learning from its mistakes.”
…
David Cameron has defended controversial proposals for a radical shake-up of the NHS, defiantly stating “the whole health profession is on board for what is now being done”.
The Prime Minister yesterday issued a passionate broadside in response to St Ives Liberal Democrat MP and Health Select Committee member Andrew George, who this week called on opponents to dig their heels in and derail service changes over concerns the NHS would become a profit-making machine at the expense of patient care.
…
I consider this posting to comply with copyright laws since
a. Only a small portion of the original article has been quoted satisfying the fair use criteria, and / or
b. This posting satisfies the requirements of a derivative work.
Please be assured that this blog is a non-commercial blog (weblog) which does not feature advertising and has not ever produced any income.
The Liberal-Denocrat CONservative coalition government is driving GPs away from the NHS.
Conservative election poster 2010
A few recent news articles about the UK’s Conservative and Liberal-Democrat coalition government – the ConDem’s – brutal attack on the National Health Service.
Earlier this week GPonline.com reported that GPs are beginning to take early retirement because of confusion around NHS reforms. The results of our poll on the issue show that 75% of you believe the Health Bill is leading GPs to retire early.
However, it is not just NHS reform that is causing GPs to consider early retirement. As the comments below our story show, changes the government is making to the NHS pension scheme are also likely to be a major factor in any decision.
Pension contributions look set to increase at a time when income for most GPs remains static (or is even falling because of rising expenses). There is also concern about the impact of the government proposals on the final value of any pension.
GPs are working harder now than ever before. And, with uncertainty about the future because of the Health Bill, worries about lack of resources in the NHS due to spending constraints in the coming years and little prospect of any increase in pay, it’s no surprise that many GPs are thinking about hanging up their stethoscopes early.
Add to this the proposed changes to public sector pensions, which means that some doctors may be financially better off if they retire now, and the government is creating a perfect storm that makes early retirement seem the only sensible option to many GPs of a certain age.
Health unions are united in their opposition to Government plans to make NHS workers pay more, work longer for less pension.
While sector talks continue, the unions have set up a campaign group to coordinate their responses and to prepare for the possibility of industrial action. Christina McAnea, UNISON Head of Health said:
“No union wants this, but our members are facing cuts in jobs, a pay freeze at a time of rising inflation, increasing workloads and stress, as well as the potential break-up of the NHS as we know it – in England at least.
“Now the Government is proposing an average 50% increase in pension contribution rates (more for higher paid staff) and staff will have to work longer to get less.”
UNISON protests wealthy private patients leapfrogging in the NHS
UNISON have been protesting about the introduction of a two-tier NHS. This is clearly an issue of privatising the NHS.
Conservative election poster 2010
A few recent news articles about the UK’s Conservative and Liberal-Democrat coalition government – the ConDem’s – brutal attack on the National Health Service.
The Department of Health is calling on software developers to create apps for use by the NHS.
Health secretary Andrew Lansley wants medical professionals and software developers to come up with ideas for “apps and maps” that would “help patients make informed decisions about their care.”
…
A protest was staged outside the Department of Health today to call for controversial health reforms to be ditched as they allow private patients to “leapfrog” to the front of NHS waiting lists.
Health union Unison, which organised the protest, warned that a lethal cocktail of economic uncertainty, spiralling waiting lists and budget deficits meant it was the “worst possible time” to be pressing ahead with the Health and Social Care Bill, which will bring in a major, untried, untested reorganisation.
The demonstration saw an acrobat dressed as a fat-cat businessman leapfrog a “living” NHS queue straight into the arms of a waiting “surgeon.”
Unison head of health Christina McAnea said: “If the Health and Social Care Bill goes ahead, the outlook for the NHS and patients looks bleak.
“The government’s polices have already led to NHS patients waiting longer, often in great pain, for their operations.
“The Bill will make matters worse by taking the cap off the number of private patients that hospitals are allowed to treat.
“It will be an enormous temptation for cash-strapped hospitals to boost their income by prioritising paying patients, pushing NHS patients even further down the ever-spiralling waiting lists.
“Even 14 of the elite group of foundation trusts ended the last financial year in deficit, which is a grim warning for the future of NHS finances.
“The economic uncertainty and budget deficits add to this lethal cocktail and it should be obvious to the government that now is not the time to bring in this massive, damaging NHS reorganisation.”
Unison said that latest statistics revealed NHS waiting times were increasing, with those waiting six months or more for treatment up by 61 per cent in the last year, while the government’s drive for £20 billion in efficiency savings was said to be leading to ward closures, staff cuts and rationing across the country.
…
A few recent news articles about the UK’s Conservative and Liberal-Democrat coalition government – the ConDem’s – brutal attack on the National Health Service.
In a shocking revelation, it has come to light that the controversial Government plans to reform NHS pensions could put an extra £230,000 burden on GPs over their career. It has been reported that BMA forecasts have revealed that the NHS pension reforms made by the Government earlier this year are already raiding GPs up to £125,000 each over the course of their lifetimes.
Further, GPs will lose £124,500 by the time they reach 85, if the proposal produced in April, involving shift from use of the retail price index to the lower consumer price index to uplift NHS pensions, is passed.
Reacting to the unjustifiable changes to the financially healthy pension scheme, Dr. Hamish Meldrum, chair of the BMA council, said: “his isn’t about affordability; it’s about the Treasury looking for yet another quick hit from public sector workers. Doctors pursuing a career as a consultant or GP will have to pay significantly higher contributions in return for a much reduced pension at retirement”.
…
Exclusive GPs have been forced to formally complain to PCTs over a series of technical and administrative problems with referral management centres, with one practice claiming a quarter of its referrals have been rejected.
In NHS West Essex, GPs have been left frustrated by rejections and the insistence of administrators that referrals are resubmitted, sometimes several times, without having been triaged by its Central Referral Service.
Examples of rejections include a referral to a surgeon for diagnosis and removal of a lump refused because a minor surgery proforma was not attached, and a gynaecology referral refused ‘in error’.
A GP in Uttlesford, Essex, who wished not to be named, said: ‘I am vehemently opposed to referral management systems. It is intensely frustrating and is not working for administrative reasons and ludicrous technical problems.’
A practice manager at a practice in Essex claimed a quarter of its referrals had been rejected by the referral triage system: ‘I feel our patients are suffering. So many receive letters stating their appointments have been cancelled.’
…
The NHS is spending nearly £16million a year paying recruitment firms to headhunt senior executives … it was revealed yesterday.
In one example, a primary care trust paid an agency more than £111,000 to fill the post of its chief executive, only to later promote its own deputy into the role.
The vast expenditure comes despite Government promises to cut back on “wasteful bureaucracy” among health trusts.
Health Secretary Andrew Lansley has pledged to reduce money spent on managers and pen-pushers by 45 per cent over the next four years. Hospitals are also being forced to axe thousands of front-line staff in an effort to save the NHS billions of pounds.
Yesterday, Freedom of Information figures revealed primary care trusts and strategic health authorities spent an estimated £15.9million paying recruitment firms to hire new managers.
…
PCTs struggle to justify Darzi centres after revelations of low patient numbers
Statistics from over 95 PCTs have revealed that 26% of Darzi centres have fewer than 500 registered patients, and that 35% had fewer than 1,000 patents.
The new information was gained through the Freedom of information Act and revealed via investigation by GP online that also found that over 12% of all Darzi centres had no registered patients whatsoever (though some stated that they did not offer this option). One of the centres had just a single registered patient.
Each PCT was forced to set up a Darzi centre under the previous government as part of a plan to provide primary patient care seven days a week between the hours of 8am and 8pm each day.
The centres cost around £1.1m each year and the General Practitioners Committee’s (GPC) negotiator, Dr Peter Holden, has stated that the on reflection the centres were “a massive waste of money”, saying that it was “outrageous” that centres had failed to register fewer than 500 patents.
Adelaide Surgery in Southampton has just 1,220 patients registered, GP Online reveals, despite receiving £907,000 in 2011/12, which means the centre receives around £743 per patient per year – or seven times as most GP practices.
…
[I need to check, but I think that the real issue about Darzi centres (Polyclinics) is that PCTs were forced to provide them by government ~ Darzi clinics being the latest policy fad. ‘The Plot Against the NHS’ by Colin Leys and Stewart Player discusses Darzi clinics.]
Thursday, December 18, 2008 – Danger of dust explosions on the London Underground
This blog was mysteriously deleted in early December 2005. [edit: 2006] Here is a posting from the deleted previous content. [19/8/11 It was actually mysteriously deleted in early December 2008]
� January 10, 2006 – Danger of dust explosions on the London Underground
Danger of dust explosions on the London Underground
This article argues that the danger of dust explosions from combustible tunnel dust on the London underground has not been properly recognised and addressed. It suggests that the RMT union urgently investigates the dangers of dust explosions on the tube so that it is able to ensure the safety of its members and the public.
In the last 20 years industrial dust explosions have accounted for several hundred deaths and hundreds of millions of dollars of insurance money and yet they are one of the least recognised of industrial fire hazards. They can occur within any process where a combustible dust is produced, and can be triggered by any energy source, including static sparks, friction and incandecent material.
There are a few basic rules to observe to see whether a dust is capable of causing a dust explosion:
The dust must be combustible.
The dust must be capable of becoming airborne.
The dust must have a size distribution capable of flame propagation.
The dust concentration must be within the explosible range.
An ignition source must be present.
The atmosphere must contain sufficient oxygen to support and sustain combustion.
London Underground does not recognise tunnel dust as a potential fire and explosive hazard.
Mike Strzelecki, LUL: It’s dust, it’s caked on dust, it’s a mixture of iron from the action of the rail on the wheel and vice versa, it’s human dust in terms of skin and hair particles which we all shed routinely, and it’s quartz from the brake locks on trains. Now, a lot of research has been done into this over the years, including very recently, indeed we had an Institute examine all the research that’s been done to determine whether this stuff is dangerous to people’s health or not, and the answer is that there is no evidence that it is, and the most sort of compelling evidence that it isn’t, is that the staff who work on the underground who are obviously are in the underground environment much longer than customers, there is no evidence of any medical problems occurring from long hours and many years of exposure, working in the underground.
Eric Ollerenshaw: Is there a fire risk?
Mike Strzelecki, LUL: No, it doesn’t burn.
Having reviewed available evidence – concentrating particularly on incidents in 2003 – this article calls for an urgent investigation into the fire and explosive dangers of tunnel dust on the London Underground.
Is tube tunnel dust dangerous?
London Underground have conducted inquiries into the possible dangers of breathing tunnel dust. These inquiries provide an insight into the composition of tunnel dust. Care should be taken in evaluating the findings since the studies concentrate on suspended dust in stations and drivers’ cabs. It is likely that the dust actually inside the tunnels is different since it is a different environment. There is little movement of air, tube trains travel along sections between platforms and dust probably accumulates in the deeper parts of tunnels. Tunnel dust may have a higher iron content from wear of the rails and wheels and less organic content from passangers clothes, etc.
Studies into London tube tunnel-dust reveal that it is composed of iron, silica and organic products. Different studies have arrived at different ratios of these constitiuents with London Underground finding a roughly 50% iron content and a study conducted by IOM finding a 90% iron content.
It is generally accepted that dust must be smaller than 0.1mm in diamater to pose an explosive hazard, with smaller particles being more explosive. The dust inhalation studies on the London tube have been concerned with much smaller particles than this.
[PM10s are particles with a diamater less than 10 micrometres, PM2.5 have a diamater less that 2.5 micrometre. 1 micrometre = 1 millionth of a metre, 1×10-9m]
Institute of Occupationa Medicine report ‘Study of tunnel dust in the London Underground’
Composition of tunnel dust: Samples from station platforms showed that almost all (typically, about 90%) of the dust in the PM 2.5 samples was analysed as iron. There were trace amounts of chromium (0.1 ? 0.2%), manganese (0.6 ? 1%) and copper (0.1 ? 1.5%). No zinc was detected on any of the samples (<0.1%). Quartz, analysed in respirable dust, accounted for only 1-2%; these measurements were approximate, being close to the analytical detection limit.
…
The distributions from the three stations are remarkably similar, with the data from Hampstead being slightly finer. The median diameter for the dust from Oxford Circus and Holland Park is 0.4µm and for Hampstead 0.35µm. In each case about 80% of the particles have a diameter less than 1µm. Again, note that this underestimates the aerodynamic diameter of the denser particles.
[µm is micrometre – one millionth of a metre (1×10-6 m), equivalent to one thousandth of a millimetre.]
Does it burn? is the big question. If it burns, then it is explosive when suspended or thrown into the air.
Tunnel dust silica crystals have a coating of iron on their surface, which makes them less likely to cause fibrotic lung disease.
Since the silica is coated with iron, it will burn.
Have there been dust explosions on the tube?
Eyewitness accounts certainly suggest that there have been many dust explosions on the tube. Witnesses often speak of smoke, dust and fires. There have been many trackside fires. If not dust, then what’s burning? It’s almost as if there’s a conspiracy to deny this real danger to tube users.
Passengers involved in a horrific rail crash on London Underground told last night how they escaped death thanks to a miraculous chain of events after a Tube train lost a wheel and hit the tunnel wall.
Yesterday’s crash, which left 30 people injured and prompted fresh questions about under-investment in rail safety, happened shortly after 2pm as the train was travelling from St Paul’s to Chancery Lane.
Witnesses said sparks flew from beneath the train, which was carrying 800 people, before the three rear carriages left the tracks, bouncing from wall to wall and sending passengers flying from their seats. Last night one man was being treated for a suspected broken leg after being smashed into the opposite side of the train.
Amid scenes of panic as the carriages were plunged into darkness and smoke billowed through smashed windows and doors, some passengers helped others out along the track. ‘I was absolutely panicking,’ said Claire Ellis. ‘I was thinking: this is it, this is the day it happens.’
…
The hospital said many passengers had suffered smoke inhalation.
…
Economics student Humaiun Kobir, 25, was on the last carriage. ‘The train was being thrown from side to side, hitting both walls of the tunnel. All the lights went out and thick black smoke was pouring in. I could hear the driver over the radio shouting “Mayday, mayday” then the train stopped.
‘He asked all the passengers to get to the front as quickly as possible. My first thought was that it was some kind of terrorist attack. We were all terrified that another train was going to smash into the back of us. But we knew there was a fire and no one wanted to run into that.’
More than 90 passengers had to be evacuated from a Tube train and walked to safety through the tunnel following a track fire, London Underground (LU) said.
Fire crews were called to a small track-side fire on the Bakerloo Line at Embankment at about 1340 BST, a LU spokeswoman said.
During the incident, one of the trains stalled in the tunnel and 94 passengers were stranded on board for 40 minutes before being walked down to Waterloo station.
The incident was one of three to affect rail and tube networks in London during the day.
The Rail Maritime and Transport (RMT) union also claimed a “potentially serious” incident was averted on 11 October when a driver decided to evacuate a train and take it out of service because of a defect.
It said the train had a seized axle which could have resulted in a derailment if it had continued, but LU accused the RMT of exaggerating the incident.
Eyewitness Harry Anscombe, 22, arrived at the station at 1015 BST as emergency services pulled up outside. “There were lots of blackened faces and there was one man with bandages on his face and blood streaming down,” he said.
Mr Anscombe asked one of the passengers what had happened, but the man said he did not know because it was “so black down there”. The passenger said the derailment had caused a huge amount of dust to fly up, making it difficult to see.
Why we need an inquiry
This article raises the issue of the unacknowledged danger of dust explosions on the London tube. There is no indication that London Underground has investigated the danger of dust explosions. On the contrary, evidence is presented that suggests that London Underground has been complacent and negligent in its approach to public safety. The article suggests – through witness accounts – that dust explosions have played a role in tube incidents.
Should it be accepted that dust poses an explosive hazard on the London tube, then safety procedures must change. Maintence needs to be performed flawlessly so that nothing disturbs the dust and that there are no sources of heat to ignite it. Drivers and other staff need to be trained properly so that they can better ensure their own and the public’s safety. Drivers need to know that they should not drive through visible clouds of dust.
Ten minutes later, a driver on a following train reported Bethnal Green and Liverpool Street stations were “really dusty and murky”. The controller reports “there might be a problem with the train in front” and the driver replied “it ain’t half kicking up a lot of dust”. It is suggested that the RMT urgently investigates the dangers of dust explosions on the London tube.
� January 11, 2006 – Fire alert on London tube 11/1/2006
Posted by dizzy
REUTERS reports smoke and fire engines attending 2 tube stations.
Is it fair to assume that smoke is coming from a tunnel?No smoke without fire eh?
LONDON (Reuters) – No one was hurt in an alert that brought fire engines to two London Underground stations on Wednesday, police said.
A spokewoman for London Transport police said firefighters had checked reports of smoke coming from the Bakerloo line, but the incident was not threatening. Fire engines were sent to Oxford Circus and Piccadilly Circus.
� May 3, 2006 – Ignition
Posted by parallax
BBC NEWS – Track power surge releases flare
Last Updated: Saturday, 1 October 2005, 16:08 GMT 17:08 UKTrain passengers fled a platform after a power surge sent a flare 10 foot into the air from the track.
An eye witness described people screaming as the fireball moved along the track at London Bridge station on Saturday afternoon.
Electrician Peter Difolco, 44, was returning from a shopping trip when he said there was a large flash.
“It was like a Roman candle firework, there was lots of smoke and people were screaming and running out the station.”
‘Station evacuated’
Mr Difolco, who was with his wife, said he had an idea it was something electrical.
“I had guessed it was something electrical but there were a lot of frightened people.
“There was a small explosion like a firecracker. It went up quite high and started working its way down the track, it went about 120 foot and it lasted for about a minute.
“There were lots of police sirens and then the station was evacuated and staff were comforting people.”
British Transport Police confirmed there was an incident involving a power line at the station at about 1330 BST.
There seem to be problems with the nature and the location of the explosives. If they were dust cloud explosions, then they would be over a wide area and there would be no explosives to identify.
A few recent news articles about the UK’s Conservative and Liberal-Democrat coalition government – the ConDem’s – brutal attack on the National Health Service.
…
In a damning report, the Treasury select committee says that with the yield on government bonds at near-record lows, using a PFI deal for a new infrastructure project could end up costing up to 1.7 times as much as paying for it directly out of the public purse.
Andrew Tyrie, the committee’s Conservative chairman, urged the chancellor to call an immediate review, and bring the costs of all previous projects on to the Treasury’s balance sheet.
The independent office for budget responsibility recently estimated that the total liability from the capital costs of PFI projects alone was about £40bn, which would increase Britain’s debt-to-GDP ratio by almost 3%.
The PFI was first announced by Norman Lamont in 1992, but the complex deals proliferated at Gordon Brown’s Treasury. Private sector providers agree to build and run schools, hospitals and other infrastructure projects, typically over 30 years, in exchange for a stream of payments from the public purse.
But Tyrie said that instead of transferring risk to the private sector and cutting costs for the taxpayer, PFI had fooled the public – and Whitehall officials – into thinking they could get shiny new public services “on the never-never”.
…
John Healey MP, Labour’s Shadow Health Secretary, said in response to official figures published today revealing that the number of people who waited over 18 weeks for NHS treatment increased by over 9,000 between June 2010 and June this year – up by a third:
“Compared with last year, a third more patients are waiting longer than 18 weeks for hospital treatment and the situation is getting worse by the month. With the figures also showing a doubling since May 2010 in the number of patients waiting over a year for treatment, it is clear that people can’t trust David Cameron to keep his NHS promises.
“The NHS is starting to go backwards again under the Tories. Instead of concentrating efforts on improving services for patients, Ministers have spent a wasted year forcing through their reckless and damaging NHS reorganisation.”
The NHS Future Forum is to conduct a second stage of its listening exercise following a request by the government to assess its revised proposals.
It will focus on how to use information to improve public health, education and training for healthcare workers, integrating care and the public’s health.
The announcement has been applauded by The King’s Fund, which said it would provide an opportunity to further examine some of the government’s proposals.
…
UNISON, the UK’s largest union, today accused Health Secretary, Andrew Lansley of selective hearing over his response to the NHS Future Forum’s (FF) recommendations.
“Far from implementing the core recommendations on competition, the Health Secretary is just ignoring the parts that he doesn’t wants to hear”, warned Christina McAnea, UNISON’s Head of Health.
The NHS Future Forum announced today it is continuing its listening exercise, but the union is calling on the Government not to just listen, but to take action over fears raised by NHS staff, patients, health unions and the public.
Christina McAnea, went on to say:
“The Future Forum said that Monitor should not be an economic regulator and its primary concern should be the quality of patient care. Andrew Lansley has not adopted this recommendation and Monitor’s main objective is to enforce competition law paving the way for privatisation.
“The Forum also recommended that the Bill should include reference to promoting collaboration and co-operation in the NHS that is still sadly missing from the Bill. The NHS benefits hugely from open sharing of ideas and innovations adopting a ‘commercial confidentiality’ approach will be a major step backwards for patients.”
…
An article from my previous ‘On a quiet day, I can hear her breathing’ blog which ceased on 31 May 2011. The previous blog was mysteriously deleted in early April 2008.
Thursday, December 18, 2008 – Blair’s government and Metropolitan Police policy dictated by the Jerusalem Post
� April 19, 2006 – Blair’s government and Metropolitan Police policy dictated by the Jerusalem Post
Ian Blair’s letter to the Home Office stating that he is blocking the Independent Police Complaints Commission (incorrectly dated 21 July 2005, correct date 22 July 2005) reveals concern for the tactics and sources used in the killing of Jean Charles de Menezes.”There is much concern about revealing either the tactics that we have and/or the sources of information on which we are operating.”Makes you wonder … doesn’t it? Lets review the situation.On 7 July, 2005 a series of at least three explosions occurred on the London tube network followed by an explosion on a London bus approximately an hour later. 56 people were killed and hundreds injured. I have proposed that the tube explosions – but not the bus bombing – were the result of incompetence, negligence or ignorancesince there was an anti-terrorism exercise being carried out at the same time. I have also written about the unacknowledged danger of dust explosions on the London underground. It is worth noting that Peter Power of Visor Consultants that had organised the exercise has stated that the explosions occured at “precisely” where his fictitious explosions were planned and that they had prepared their exercise without external assistance (i.e. without consulting fire safety experts).
“On July 22, an innocent Brazilian citizen was gunned down inside a London Underground train during a bungled police operation which followed the second terrorist attack in London. The Metropolitan Police says the shooting was a “tragic mistake”. But behind the public contrition there lies a web of contradictory statements, deviation from routine procedures, and a mist of confusion that has led to serial calls for the resignation of the Met’s head, Sir Ian Blair. And throughout four weeks of calls for clarity and the truth, has been the odour of a police cover-up that has refused to retreat in its intensity.”
Halevi calls for the “complete destruction” of the enemy. The police shoot to kill.
Dig deeper say the Zionists. “Roots are not superficial, but deep” says Blair.
“Measured, surgical steps” say the Zionists. Jean Charles de Menezes, a ‘surgical strike’.
“Sleeper cells” say the Zionists. Police ‘discover’ a sleeper-cell.
The Zionists say “British security had not been caught sleeping, but rather didn’t root out terror cells with enough resolve.” MI5 not at fault, the police shoot to kill, the roots are deep.
“In the past two years, they have arrested several cells. But this attack shows they didn’t go deep enough and this is mainly due to legal and cultural restrictions. Now they will be much freer to go deeper,” Cristal predicted. The roots are deep, Jean Charles de Menezes murdered, Guardian reports that Blair considers that socialists are terrorists, Blair attempts to introduce 90 days detention for terrorist suspects, other ‘anti-terrorism’ laws introduced.
“It’s about preventing the next attack. The big challenge the Brits are facing now is to use this chance to redefine the balance between human rights and measures against terrorism,” he said. Blair tries to redefine the balance between human rights and measures against terrorism.
