NHS news review

The big NHS news story today is that the Government is reviewing a large IT contract to provide a records system across the NHS. The project was inherited from Labour and has wasted billions. There are ways to ensure good management of huge IT projects but successive UK governments have failed. I expect that many good lunches have been had with so many billions.

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.

NHS medical records project shows little benefit, say MPs | Society | The Guardian

The Department of Health will not deliver the £11bn programme intended to create electronic records for all 55 million NHS patients in England and has been “unable to demonstrate” any benefits for the taxpayer, according to a scathing report from MPs.

The Commons public accounts committee said parts of the national programme for IT have proved to be unworkable.

The Department of Health has so far spent £6.4bn on the programme, which was launched in 2002, including £2.7bn on patient records.

MPs said the intention of creating electronic records was a “worthwhile aim” but one “that has proved beyond the capacity of the department to deliver”.

The IT project has floundered almost since the day it was conceived. The national scheme was broken up into five administrative areas, with each region handing out a contract – often worth billions – to big private players, which, it was envisaged, would commission software houses to write computer code.

Vulture IT contractors bleed NHS dry – Civil service ships talent elsewhere | TechEye

An expert in IT leadership has hit out at the government and the civil service’s cluelessness with IT, tracing back the £11 billion NHS IT debacle to Blair’s cultivation of outsourcing.

The comments come on the back of a select committee report calling for the end of the centralised NHS IT project. It marks another shocking failure at every level. MPs agree that the National Programme, part of a wider £11.4 billion e-record scheme, desperately needs an urgent review.

“The Department of Health is not going to achieve its original aim of a fully integrated care records system across the NHS,” said committee chair Margaret Hodgson MP.

“Trying to create a one-size-fits-all system in the NHS was a massive risk and has proven to be unworkable.”

Yet again, the government was paying way over the odds for services which did not work. BT is a culprit, leading to accusations of government officials having all the bargaining nous of a first-round Apprentice contestant. The report says the government is “clearly overpaying BT to implement systems,” and according to the Committee, it squeezed £9 million where the exact same systems had been purchased at other NHS organisations for £2 million.

Continue ReadingNHS news review

NHS news review

Conservative election poster 2010

An article about the UK’s Conservative and Liberal-Democrat coalition government – the ConDem’s – brutal attack on the National Health Service.

Yorkshire health trusts ‘to lose out by £100m’ – Main Section – Yorkshire Post

THE Government will slash more than £100m from Yorkshire health trusts’ budgets while increasing spending in wealthy areas of the South, new research has claimed.

Labour said changes to funding formulas will result in 10 primary care trusts in the region having their budgets cut, while Surrey, Kensington, Hampshire, Oxfordshire and Hertfordshire will enjoy a cash boost.

For years areas which have higher incidences of poor health have been given higher per capita funding, but this weighting is set to be reduced.

The study, produced by Public Health Manchester for the Parliamentary Health Select Committee, has heaped more pressure on the Government. Transport and local government funding allocations were also claimed to strongly favour the South, while public sector cuts have also hit the North harder, the vast majority of new private sector jobs being created in London and the wider South East.

 

Continue ReadingNHS news review

NHS news review

It has emerged that Andrew Taylor, head of the Co-operation and Competition Panel has been liaising extremely closely with private-sector lobbying groups to produce the report claiming that PCTs impose waiting so that patients either pay for treatment or die. There’s a feint, familiar ring to that … a circular echo, something in a spin?

Anyway then he got taken to a Health Investor’s dinner. Of course, Health Investor’s dinner would be packed with higher management of private health care companies – the perfect situatuion for Taylor to be networked.

Hypocrite Andrew Lansley condemned PCTs for the actions claimed by the report when – of course – he is largely responsible for them. It is Lansley and the Con-Dems that are destroying the NHS and imposing huge cuts. It is clear that this was the intention.

There are reports on Labour’s analysis that deprived areas will see greater cuts than relatively prosporous areas. The Con-Dems’ are stealing from the poor to give to the rich.

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.

Private healthcare group lobbied competition body for NHS inquiry | Society | The Guardian

The close links between a private sector lobby group and an NHS regulator in the runup to the launch of a groundbreaking inquiry into competition in the health service have emerged in a series of documents passed to the Guardian.

Emails released under the Freedom of Information Act show that NHS Partners Network, a lobby group which represents companies including Care UK, Circle, General Healthcare Group, Bupa and United Health, helped draft a letter requesting a formal investigation into how firms were being blocked from getting NHS work. A week later the private healthcare lobby group took the regulator out to a £250-a-head gala dinner.

The network began lobbying the Co-operation and Competition Panel (CCP) last October for an inquiry into restrictions on the use of non-state companies in the health service – an investigation that was given the go-ahead two months later. The result was a report published this week which included recommendations to offer patients “more choice” because people were “dying” while waiting for operations in NHS hospitals.

Since 2006, patients have had a right to choose where they go for treatment for elective surgery, including private hospitals. In this week’s landmark ruling the panel found that almost half of NHS primary care trusts, the state bodies which control health budgets, were unreasonably restricting patients’ choice over where they go for operations.

The tactics employed included setting minimum waiting times before patients were getting treated – even when private providers could treat them – and directing GPs to refer patients to keep cash flowing into a local hospital.

In a contentious passage the regulator claimed that “we understand that patients will ‘remove themselves from the waiting list’ either by dying or by paying for their own treatment at private sector providers”.

Andrew Lansley, the health secretary, leapt on the findings, telling the BBC that “too many [trusts] have been operating in a cynical environment where they can game the system – and in which political targets, particularly the maximum 18-week waiting time target, are used to delay treatment.”

However, David Stout, director of the PCT Network, described this claim as “unsubstantiated”, pointing out that average waiting times were just eight weeks for what were non-emergency and therefore non-life threatening operations. He said the regulator’s statements “cause unnecessary public anxiety and alarm”.

Emails, obtained by Spinwatch which campaigns for greater transparency in government, between the head of the CCP, Andrew Taylor, and David Worskett, the director of the NHS Partners Network, reveal the inquiry followed a letter from the lobby group to the Department of Health, which Taylor helped draft.

It’s obvious why PCTs are making patients wait » Hospital Dr

You really have to wonder what it’s like in the world of a Tory minister. It’s evidently a place where nobody has to rely on a public service. David Cameron’s gratitude to the NHS for treating his son Ivan, frequently repeated in the run up to the election, seems to have been conveniently forgotten.

First we have Steve Hilton, David Cameron’s director of ‘strategy’ (for which his qualification are…ummm…I’ll have to get back to you on that one), suggesting the abolition of maternity leave, job centres and consumer rights legislation.

Then Oliver Letwin claiming public sector workers need more ‘fear and discipline’ (how about a spot of whipping?). Thanks for that, boys – if that’s the direction of travel, we’ll soon be opening workhouses again. Let’s admit this government is devoid of intelligent ideas for deficit reduction, or indeed, any grasp on the realities of life for the majority who don’t have a trust fund and didn’t go to Eton.

Then we have the Cooperation and Competition Panel doing what it was set up to do – clobbering the NHS and cosying up to the private sector. Its report last week claims that PCT’s are unfairly giving work to local hospitals, and restricting access for elective surgery to save money.

Making patients wait for treatment, we’re told, is designed expressly to force those who can afford it to go privately. Not only that – those wicked managers are hoping that many others will tidy themselves off the waiting list by dying before they finally get an op date. With breathtaking hypocrisy, the government piles in with expressions of horror, completely ignoring the reason why PCT’s are so desperate to save money. It’s a shame PCTs are so strapped for cash that they can’t treat CCP members to the same corporate entertainment package that lobbyists from the private healthcare industry recently did, according to a report in The Guardian. It was obviously be money well spent.

What the government also fails to acknowledge, is that this was always the plan – i.e. to force NHS waiting lists to increase so that the private sector is able to ride in and save the day – patients will either pay privately, or demand an alternative provider. And this is before the Health and Social Care Bill has even become law.

Deprived areas in England will ‘lose out’ in NHS reforms – UK Politics, UK – The Independent

Deprived areas in England will lose out to affluent parts of the country under health spending reforms, Labour has claimed.

Changes to funding formulas means poor health rates will be given less consideration when cash is allocated, the party said.

It suggested areas like Manchester and the London borough of Tower Hamlets would lose out to parts of the wealthy south east, such as Surrey and Hampshire.

Labour based the claims on an assessment of funding reforms by public health bodies in Manchester.

 

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

Continue ReadingNHS news review

Thinking about restating the list …

and whether ACPO & co should be on it.

If ACPO are on it … should they all be on it?

That’s reasonable, don’t you think?

I am a political dissident and I object strongly to be treated as a terrorist. Isn’t it ACPO & co that are the terrorists? Ian Blair definitely was and was clearly persuing a vendetta whenever he opened his arse.

 

Continue ReadingThinking about restating the list …

NHS news review

David Cameron is accused by Labour of breaking an election pledge that NHS spending would not be cut.

NHS cuts costs by delaying operations so that patients either go private or die.

Unhealthy foods kill. Lansley consults with junk food pushers.

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.

Cameron accused of breaking pledge on NHS, as health spending falls | Politics | The Guardian

David Cameron was accused of breaking his biggest pledge at the general election – a guarantee that health spending will increase every year in real terms – after Treasury figures showed a fall in spending in the coalition’s first year in government.

Labour accused the government of burying figures in a Treasury document which show that spending on the NHS was cut in real terms to £101.9bn in the coalition’s first year in office from £102.7bn in Labour’s last year in government.

John Healey, the shadow health secretary, said: “David Cameron has broken his NHS pledge. He put up posters pledging to cut the deficit, not the NHS, but we see now that the Tory-led government has already cut spending on the NHS in its first year.

“On top of this cut, Cameron’s reckless NHS reorganisation is set to cost £2bn, money which could be better spent treating patients. And there are more cuts forecast in future years. This proves again what people have seen before: that you can’t trust the Tories with the NHS.”

Labour criticised the government after figures in the Treasury’s Public Expenditure Statistical Analyses (PESA) for this month showed a cut in NHS spending in real terms from £102.7bn in 2009-10 to £101.9bn in 2010-11. The Tories opened their NHS section in their general election manifesto with the words: “We will back the NHS. We will increase health spending every year.”

In a question and answer session on 14 June the prime minister said: “I want to make this clear, you know we are not cutting spending on the NHS, we are increasing spending on the NHS. This government took a very big decision, given that the NHS is one of the biggest budgets there is in the country, we took a decision to increase by more than inflation in each year NHS spending.”

Related: Parties trade blows on NHS spending – Mortgages, Money – The Independent

Labour accuses David Cameron of breaking NHS spending pledge | Politics

NHS cuts waiting lists ‘by letting patients die’ | News

Health bosses are deliberately making patients wait for treatment so they will remove themselves from waiting lists by either going private or dying, a report has suggested.

Some Primary Care Trusts (PCTs) are refusing to operate before 15 weeks in a bid to save money, an independent agency that advises the Department of Health has discovered.

The tactic was employed by PCTs after they found that if patients were made to wait longer “some will remove themselves from the list or will no longer require treatment when it is finally offered.

“A PCT may therefore save money overall by increasing waiting times,” the report said.

“We understand that patients will ‘remove themselves from the waiting list’ either by dying or by paying for their own treatment at private sector providers,” the report by the Co-operation and Competition Panel (CCP) said.

Related: NHS delays operations ‘as it waits for patients to die or go private’ – Telegraph

Health News – Laws that restrict unhealthy food ‘would save lives and money’

The government could protect lives and save the NHS money by introducing laws that restrict unhealthy foods, experts say.

According to an article in the British Medical Journal, measures such as reducing the salt content of foods and eliminating industrial trans-fats could prevent thousands of cases of heart disease in England and Wales each year.

Researchers at the University of Birmingham’s School of Health and Population Sciences concluded that measures to reduce people’s salt intake by 3g per day or trans-fats by 0.7 per cent could save the NHS £40 million or £230 million, respectively, per year.

‘The findings are reassuringly consistent with results from very different methods in the United States, Australia and the UK Treasury,’ the study authors wrote.

McDonald’s and PepsiCo to help write UK health policy | Politics | The Guardian

The Department of Health is putting the fast food companies McDonald’s and KFC and processed food and drink manufacturers such as PepsiCo, Kellogg’s, Unilever, Mars and Diageo at the heart of writing government policy on obesity, alcohol and diet-related disease, the Guardian has learned.

In an overhaul of public health, said by campaign groups to be the equivalent of handing smoking policy over to the tobacco industry, health secretary Andrew Lansley has set up five “responsibility deal” networks with business, co-chaired by ministers, to come up with policies. Some of these are expected to be used in the public health white paper due in the next month.

The groups are dominated by food and alcohol industry members, who have been invited to suggest measures to tackle public health crises. Working alongside them are public interest health and consumer groups including Which?, Cancer Research UK and the Faculty of Public Health. The alcohol responsibility deal network is chaired by the head of the lobby group the Wine and Spirit Trade Association. The food network to tackle diet and health problems includes processed food manufacturers, fast food companies, and Compass, the catering company famously pilloried by Jamie Oliver for its school menus of turkey twizzlers. The food deal’s sub-group on calories is chaired by PepsiCo, owner of Walkers crisps.

The leading supermarkets are an equally strong presence, while the responsibility deal’s physical activity group is chaired by the Fitness Industry Association, which is the lobby group for private gyms and personal trainers.

In early meetings, these commercial partners have been invited to draft priorities and identify barriers, such as EU legislation, that they would like removed. They have been assured by Lansley that he wants to explore voluntary not regulatory approaches, and to support them in removing obstacles. Using the pricing of food or alcohol to change consumption has been ruled out. One group was told that the health department did not want to lead, but rather hear from its members what should be done.

 

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

Continue ReadingNHS news review