NHS news review

Spread the love

The Future Forum is due to report on the “listening exercise” on NHS ‘reforms’ today. It is expected to recommend many far-reaching changes to the proposed Abolition of the NHS bill. For example, it is likely to recommend that the Secretary of State for Health remains responsible for providing a health service and changes to the role of Monitor.

The Liberal Democrats are claiming that they have achieved victory in protecting the NHS. Unions Unite and Unison are far more reasonably cautious in their assessment and repeat their call that the bill should be abandoned in its entirety. It is a mistake to assume that the battle has been won.

It is absolutely ridiculous that Clegg and the Liberal-Democrats should claim that they have protected the NHS when Clegg & Co were fully supportive of the bill initially. While the Liberal-Democrat Spring Conference played a role, that is far removed from Clegg & Co. Many groups and individuals – and most notably many professional medical groups of GPs, nurses and surgeons – are united in their opposition to the destruction of the NHS. Clegg & Co were forced to respond to the pressure of opposition.

Conservative election poster 2010

A few recent news articles concerning the UK’s Conservative and Liberal-Democrat coalition government – the ConDem’s – brutal attack on the National Health Service.

NHS Bill “not fit for purpose” / Britain / Home – Morning Star

Unions demanded today that the government’s Health Bill be scrapped on the eve of new recommendations from the hastily assembled body overseeing the coalition’s official “listening exercise.”

The NHS Future Forum, made up of handpicked staff, community and patient representatives, will set out today why and how it believes the government should amend its stalled Health and Social Care Bill.

The forum, established by Mr Cameron, has been tasked with gathering the views of doctors, nurses and patients.

Mr Cameron claimed that the government had listened to concerns about the Bill raised during the initiative, which saw more than 200 events held across the country.

But Unite the union national officer for health Rachael Maskell dismissed the ploy, calling for the Bill to go altogether.

She said: “It is time to scrap the Bill and conduct a proper review of what is needed for the long-term needs of the NHS and our nation’s health, rather than rush through a biased, lop-sided listening exercise.”

A Unison spokeswoman also reiterated the union’s view that the Bill should be scrapped, adding that “fiddling around on the edges is not going to make this Bill any more sensible for patients and is no more than a smokescreen for £20 billion of cuts being driven through the NHS.”

Letters: Marketisation and the healthcare bill | Society | The Guardian

It is not voters who “will not tolerate any further delays” (David Cameron and Nick Clegg to ‘show unity’ over NHS reforms report, 7 June) but the coalition government – which is trying to push through its proposals to turn the NHS into a market before the summer recess. Many campaigners feel the bill should be scrapped and that the stated aims could be achieved more cheaply without legislation. This position was also endorsed at the Lib Dem conference in March in a resolution: “Conference recognises however that all of the above policies and aspirations can be achieved without adopting the damaging and unjustified market-based approach that is proposed.”

Unless part 3 of the bill which relates to Monitor is withdrawn, marketisation will continue; if Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland can manage without such a body, why do we need one in England? I note that the budget for GPs, which was originally said to be £80bn until March when Mr Lansley told the health select committee that it would be £60bn, has now increased to £65bn.

The government needs to stop implementing the bill before it has finished its passage through parliament, have a hard look at the figures emanating from the Department of Health, and stop trying to win this battle via spinning stories to the media. Ideally it should withdraw the bill.

Wendy Savage

Co-chair, Keep Our NHS Public

John Healey: NHS needs evolution, not Tory revolution – Commentators, Opinion – The Independent

David Cameron’s first year as Prime Minister has been a year of chaos, confusion and waste for the NHS. He promised at the election to “protect the NHS” and “stop the top-down reorganisations that have got in the way of patient care”.

Since then, we’ve had weak leadership, poor communication, bad policy and rushed legislation as part of the biggest top-down reorganisation in NHS history. Even Professor Steve Field, whose advice as chair of the Prime Minister’s Future Forum will be published tomorrow, has said the Government’s NHS changes are “unworkable” and could “destroy key services”.

All efforts now should be dedicated to reforms that the NHS needs to rise to the three biggest challenges – improving the quality, safety and consistency of care for patients; integrating services better, especially for elderly people and those living with long-term health problems; and increasing efficiency, as public finances are squeezed. But as doctors, nurses, patients groups, NHS experts and even the Tory-led Health Select Committee have all cautioned, the NHS reorganisation makes meeting these challenges harder, not easier.

The Government’s declared aims – a stronger role for clinicians in commissioning care, greater involvement of patients, less bureaucracy and more stress on improving results for patients – could all be achieved by the evolution of gains that Labour made, without legislation.

But the legislation is needed to pursue the revolution of turning the NHS into a full-scale market, modelled on the privatised utilities and driven by the force of competition law. This Tory revolution removes proper public accountability, and breaks up the NHS so patients will see greater inequality in services.

Opening the door to NHS privatisation / Features / Home – Morning Star

David Cameron is a shrewd tactician.

His five promises on the NHS, made in early June, are a classic drawing-out manoeuvre.

By provoking responses from friends and enemies, he is able to gauge the level of support for the NHS reforms and the strength of the opposition.

The Tories are in disarray over the health service – polls suggest that the majority of the population believe they have a hidden privatisation agenda.

The Liberal Democrats play to this, if only because they are desperate to regain some public support.

The durability of the coalition government depends on the continued engagement of the Lib Dems, so their pressure against Andrew Lansley’s Bill matters.

Shire Tories are taking a “if it’s not bust, don’t fix it” attitude towards the NHS.

The Conservative Party’s middle ground believes that a dose of competition would do the NHS a power of good, but do not want wholesale privatisation.

Only the metropolitan chattering classes are interested in root and branch commercialisation.

Just a few weeks ago there was a real prospect that the whole of Lansley’s Bill would be discarded.

Cameron will try to avoid that – he dare not risk a U-turn because his party’s right would not forgive him for appeasing the Lib Dems and backing away from a confrontation with the public sector.

The response of the NHS professional bodies to Cameron’s promises will matter a lot.

What the British Medical Association, the Royal Colleges and the senior managers’ body the NHS Confederation now say will influence what their members do.

Without commitment to change in the people who do the work, the reforms will stall. After some guardedly positive comments like “a significant step in the right direction,” the professions are awaiting the details of the revised reform Bill.

NHS Bill “not fit for purpose” / Britain / Home – Morning Star

Unions demanded today that the government’s Health Bill be scrapped on the eve of new recommendations from the hastily assembled body overseeing the coalition’s official “listening exercise.”

The NHS Future Forum, made up of handpicked staff, community and patient representatives, will set out today why and how it believes the government should amend its stalled Health and Social Care Bill.

The forum, established by Mr Cameron, has been tasked with gathering the views of doctors, nurses and patients.

Mr Cameron claimed that the government had listened to concerns about the Bill raised during the initiative, which saw more than 200 events held across the country.

But Unite the union national officer for health Rachael Maskell dismissed the ploy, calling for the Bill to go altogether.

She said: “It is time to scrap the Bill and conduct a proper review of what is needed for the long-term needs of the NHS and our nation’s health, rather than rush through a biased, lop-sided listening exercise.”

A Unison spokeswoman also reiterated the union’s view that the Bill should be scrapped, adding that “fiddling around on the edges is not going to make this Bill any more sensible for patients and is no more than a smokescreen for £20 billion of cuts being driven through the NHS.”

Shirley Williams: Lib Dems should take credit for thwarting Lansley – Commentators, Opinion – The Independent

NHS Forum ‘listening’ report unlikely to assuage health service fears | Ekklesia

The NHS Future Forum is due to submit its report on proposed health reforms today (Monday 13 June). It will recommend some changes to government plans, but is expected largely to fall in with Prime Minister David Cameron’s wishes for more competition and private involvement.

Concerns about NHS privatisation are likely to remain strong, however, after a joint investigation by Pulse and The Bureau of Investigative Journalism has revealed that at least half the board members of some GP consortia have links with a single, large private healthcare company.

The official NHS Future Forum review of the health service in England has been led by former Royal College of GPs chief Professor Steve Field, has carried out more than 200 consultation events with doctors, nurses and patients.

The exercise, billed by government as ‘independent’, has been running for two months, after Health Secretary Andrew Lansley’s proposals ran into a political firestorm.

But critics are suspicious that the Forum is reporting only a week after the end of the government commissioned “listening” exercise, and that its findings were already heavily shaped by the agenda set out by the Coalition.

Dr Laurence Buckman, chair of the General Practitioner Committee, told GP magazine on 10 June: “We are not so much fascinated by what the NHS Future Forum says, it’s what the government’s response will be [that interests us]… Why do governments always run to enthusiasts and advisers with a vested interest first? We [doctors] have been telling this government what we think – and we will know [soon] whether they have been listening to us.”

 

27/11/13 Having received a takedown notice from the Independent newspaper for a different posting, I have reviewed this article which links to an article at the Independent’s website in order to attempt to ensure conformance with copyright laws.

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.

dizzy

Leave a Reply