Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[jerry]

recent reports concerning the governments plans on the NHS are a bit worrying. I know of numerous examples of what can only be described as mismanagement under the current system and much of these simply would not have been allowed to happen in a private sector where individual accountabilities and responsibilities are more challenging. However, whilst it must have some business principles, I believe that a national health service is just that-a service. As with education, I have no beef with anyone who wants to spend their money in the private sector providing that the basic public sector is of a good standard. But to slash costs by getting rid of Primary Care Trusts and handing that job role over to groups of local GPs? For starters there is the costs of the redundancys plus increased unemployment and ,secondly, do GPs (notoriously difficult to negotiate with as it is) really have the time let alone the business acumen to take over from PCTs ?No, so step in the big american companies to help them out alongside our own bupas. Methinks this is a slippery slope towards a US style health care system...

[Entwood]

If it gets rid of a complete layer of total bureaucrats that do absolutely nothing towards Patient Care .. then I'm all for it.

Then get rid of half the "managers" in the hospitals and let the professionals get on with actually doing the job.

It was a PCT that ordered a CAT scanner and had it installed in a hospital at a cost of millions .. knowing full well that it would be closed 3 years later .. and that a CAT scanner, once installed .. cannot be moved to another place. .. something to do with magnetic fields.

When challenged their answer was .. a different department dealt with the CAT scanner to the one dealing with the closure ...



BTW .. I have heard of no plans to "privatise" the NHS .. just to reform it ... subtle difference .......

[jerry]

like I said,mr E, the current system is far from perfect and I have always said that it was top heavy management wise-but the alternative ? Just seems a bit worrying to me.

[jerry]

The government are of course talking of "reform" not privatisation, its just that when you look at the "reforms" they increasingly look like a kind of trojan horse to enable quite large chunks of the NHS to come under private management.

[Lazydocker]

I see no harm with the privatisation of the NHS as long as it is done sympathetically. If there is provision to provide everyone with Health Insurance as part of the NI contributions and allow a "top up" system for those who wish to pay extra.

Perhaps I'm wrong and this is a little "elitist"... I don't know.  :-/ What I do know is that the current system is not working uniformly across the country. Our local facilities/hospital are superb. SWMBO has severe allergies and we have been several times but the quality of care at other hospitals is dreadful. We visited one and had to supply our own adrenaline, which is a life saving drug, after being made to wait nearly an hour to be seen Locally, they can normally counteract the allergic reaction with anti-histamines as they are very quick!

[Marks DTM Calib]

The service part went from the NHS a long time ago.

If it takes power away from jumped up consultants and managers then I am all for it.

I would like to think that a GP would have more of a patient focus than the current system which is very department orientated and hence falls down every time you have to pass between departments for care

[Lazydocker]

I would like to think that a GP would have more of a patient focus than the current system which is very department orientated and hence falls down every time you have to pass between departments for care

Again, we are very lucky because our GP is completely patient focused. He doesn't care if he's running late, you get as long as he needs to diagnose any problems you may have. But, everyone gets the same treatment... OK, it can be frustrating if (as he normally is) he's running late but at least you don't feel like you're rushed in the 10 minute appointment which is booked

He's also very good at chasing up any referrals he has made and also not afraid to admit if he doesn't know something. SWMBO is an Audiologist and studied the ear for 2 years, passing with a double distinction. The GP generally spends no more than 2 weeks to a month studying it! So, when she goes in with ear problems (which is unfortunately quite often) he asks her what she thinks

[Marks DTM Calib]

I would like to think that a GP would have more of a patient focus than the current system which is very department orientated and hence falls down every time you have to pass between departments for care

Again, we are very lucky because our GP is completely patient focused. He doesn't care if he's running late, you get as long as he needs to diagnose any problems you may have. But, everyone gets the same treatment... OK, it can be frustrating if (as he normally is) he's running late but at least you don't feel like you're rushed in the 10 minute appointment which is booked

He's also very good at chasing up any referrals he has made and also not afraid to admit if he doesn't know something. SWMBO is an Audiologist and studied the ear for 2 years, passing with a double distinction. The GP generally spends no more than 2 weeks to a month studying it! So, when she goes in with ear problems (which is unfortunately quite often) he asks her what she thinks

Exactly my point LD, because GP's are customer focused and now holding the purse strings, the rest of the setup will have to follow suite

[Kevin Wood]

The problem with going too far down the privatisation route is when they start deciding that they can operate on one of your cataracts /  save one of your legs but it isn't "cost effective" to do the other. God help us if insurance companies get involved.

Anything's better than the mess we currently have, though.

Kevin

[mudflap]

privatisation = shareholders = profits = muddle = people dying due to lack of proper health care 

i agree about getting rid of useless managers on fat salaries, the health service is a service, it's not meant to make a profit, no way mate, we'll fight it 


f*****g tories 

[Marks DTM Calib]

The problem with going too far down the privatisation route is when they start deciding that they can operate on one of your cataracts /  save one of your legs but it isn't "cost effective" to do the other. God help us if insurance companies get involved.

Anything's better than the mess we currently have, though.

Kevin

That already happens today KW

[Entwood]

privatisation = shareholders = profits = muddle = people dying due to lack of proper health care 

i agree about getting rid of useless managers on fat salaries, the health service is a service, it's not meant to make a profit, no way mate, we'll fight it 


f*****g tories 

What an absolute load of rubbish .... I haven't seen the word "privatisation" mentioned by anyone .. except of course bigoted left wing "bruffers" ...

The labour Government .. who was supposed to work FOR the lowerpaid "bruffers" was in fact the organisation that has pushed up the number of managers on inflated salaries .. that achieve no purpose ...

Actualy .. all "empire building" by socialists feathering their own nests.

However ... "never let the truth get in the way of a good headline "

[MV6Matt]

The Whitepapaer 'Liberating the NHS' (which, it seems has been taken down from the DoH website - I wonder why?) gives a time scale for the abolition of SHAs and PCTs as 2012/13.

Most of the functions that these 2  organisations currently perform are going to local authories (it says.......)

I imagine that the roles that are moved will probably be done under TUPE so there wont be that much of a reduction in the short term (in people or salaries which is where the savings are looking to be made)

I imagine that a lot of the service provision will be tendered and this is where the 'privatisation' bit will fall available to interested companies..........
It is the commissioning bit that will go to the GPs with a smaller performance management role in the local authorities.

A big worry is that there are a large number of GPs that ain't interested in fannying around with commissioning services (although there are lots that are....) and that they will not be getting best value for their patients. Not all Gps want to be burdened with this responsibility. We will have to see how it pans out.

My main hope is that the expected savings will be used to replace front line staff (all those vacancies in my team have not been replaced and the recruitment freeze has only recently been lifted).
Having seen the NHS awash with money 1997-2003/4 it will be interesting to see if the removal of large teirs of managers at SHA/PCT level will let us get back to being allowed to do the work we came into the NHS for - seeing, treating, following-up patients post treatment etc etc. not spending hours filling in data bases and w**ky forms (and the resultant audits)

I have to say I'm not holding my breath.........

Matthew

[Lazydocker]

The Whitepapaer 'Liberating the NHS' (which, it seems has been taken down from the DoH website - I wonder why?) gives a time scale for the abolition of SHAs and PCTs as 2012/13.

Most of the functions that these 2  organisations currently perform are going to local authories (it says.......)

I imagine that the roles that are moved will probably be done under TUPE so there wont be that much of a reduction in the short term (in people or salaries which is where the savings are looking to be made)

I imagine that a lot of the service provision will be tendered and this is where the 'privatisation' bit will fall available to interested companies..........
It is the commissioning bit that will go to the GPs with a smaller performance management role in the local authorities.

A big worry is that there are a large number of GPs that ain't interested in fannying around with commissioning services (although there are lots that are....) and that they will not be getting best value for their patients. Not all Gps want to be burdened with this responsibility. We will have to see how it pans out.

My main hope is that the expected savings will be used to replace front line staff (all those vacancies in my team have not been replaced and the recruitment freeze has only recently been lifted).
Having seen the NHS awash with money 1997-2003/4 it will be interesting to see if the removal of large teirs of managers at SHA/PCT level will let us get back to being allowed to do the work we came into the NHS for - seeing, treating, following-up patients post treatment etc etc. not spending hours filling in data bases and w**ky forms (and the resultant audits)

I have to say I'm not holding my breath.........

Matthew

But this is nothing new... SWMBO had worked on the NHS PPP side of Audiology for years but cleared the waiting list so had to either work at another branch, 200+ miles from home (she was already between 80 and 150 miles from home daily) or be made redundant. This was nearly 4 years ago!

Then she was working for another private company who had tendered for a vast amount of PPP work (as a senior manager/trainer) but Alistair Darling (the then Health Minister) put pay to that by cutting the PPP budget and slashing the targets on waiting lists

[Entwood]

The Whitepapaer 'Liberating the NHS' (which, it seems has been taken down from the DoH website - I wonder why?) gives a time scale for the abolition of SHAs and PCTs as 2012/13.

Most of the functions that these 2  organisations currently perform are going to local authories (it says.......)

I imagine that the roles that are moved will probably be done under TUPE so there wont be that much of a reduction in the short term (in people or salaries which is where the savings are looking to be made)

I imagine that a lot of the service provision will be tendered and this is where the 'privatisation' bit will fall available to interested companies..........
It is the commissioning bit that will go to the GPs with a smaller performance management role in the local authorities.

A big worry is that there are a large number of GPs that ain't interested in fannying around with commissioning services (although there are lots that are....) and that they will not be getting best value for their patients. Not all Gps want to be burdened with this responsibility. We will have to see how it pans out.

My main hope is that the expected savings will be used to replace front line staff (all those vacancies in my team have not been replaced and the recruitment freeze has only recently been lifted).
Having seen the NHS awash with money 1997-2003/4 it will be interesting to see if the removal of large teirs of managers at SHA/PCT level will let us get back to being allowed to do the work we came into the NHS for - seeing, treating, following-up patients post treatment etc etc. not spending hours filling in data bases and w**ky forms (and the resultant audits)

I have to say I'm not holding my breath.........

Matthew

Agreed ... the problem, as I see it .. is the "empire builders" will not give up their "golden posts" with ease, and will all they can to prove how"important" they are. IME very few "managers" sack themselves ..

All that money was wasted on management that had no direct involvement with health care, getting back to where you guys want to be will be hard work.