Thursday, 20 January 2011

Equity and Excellence? - Balderdash and Piffle!

Defiance against proposed decimation of the NHS!

Here is a rehashed synopsis of the threat to our NHS that the new Health Bill poses. This a significantly edited version of notes provided by the astute and auspicious Dr Jackie Turner, who attended the recent Keep the NHS Public Meeting in Waltham Forest. Many of that group will be attending our protest on the 29th January.
Please sign our petition:

http://www.petitionbuzz.com/petitions/handsoffournhs

EQUITY AND EXCELLENCE: LIBERATING THE NHS

Implications for the NHS.

This Bill is probably the biggest re-structuring of the NHS since 1948 and was not declared in the election manifesto of either the Conservatives or the Liberal Party. They simply have no mandate for it.

The White Paper assumes it will cut bureaucracy and improving efficiency but the scheme is flawed and based on naïve assumption. Under the new bill the NHS is obliged to cut management costs by 45% over the next four years. There is a stated desire to improve efficiency by simplifying the structure of NHS. PCTs and practice based commissioners will be replaced by GP Consortia. No evidence has been provided to support the idea that this will improve efficiency?

What would be the result of GP Consortiums being unable to make the efficiency saving that this document requires? Would the NHS then be taken over by the private sector who are already hovering?

The US spend 17.4% of GDP on health, most of it goes to insurance companies and drug companies, their health care is amongst the worst in the developed world, people die on the streets because they can’t afford health care. Is this the fate for the future of Health in Britain?

Get ready for a catastrophe:

The Coalition Government justify the burdensome disruption and loss of jobs by saying they have a moral obligation to release as much money as possible to front line care. Could tax Vodafone, Phillip Green, cancel Trident, stop the war and there would be more than enough money to pay off the deficit, this is ideological and they choose to cut public spending rather than to collect revenue through the tax system, except to raise VAT which disproportionately affects the poor.

They expect the NHS to make energy savings and to develop more sustainable forms of delivery to help reduce costs! It would help if the Govt engaged in programmes to enhance sustainable renewable energy sources.

Reality:

Cuts in social care will put additional strain on NHS budgets, “bed blocking.”

£80 billion given to GPs not trained to do it can not possibly be a pragmatic solution to the current problem. Many doctors are against the proposals yet there is no remit for an opt out? How will GPS set up consortia? They need to be big enough to minimise the financial risk. Different GPs have different visions, some boroughs have splits and more than one consortium. If Local consortia cross existing service boundaries it will cause confusion and error. Many GPs have expressed concern that if theye don’t cut costs, others will brought in to do it for them. This creates a conflict of interest and impacts negatively on Dr/Patient relationship.

It is time to rip PFI contracts Royal London is now the most expensive hospital to run in Europe. With burgeoning costs of £1million per bed and them having to pay interest for thirty years, to finance institutions that have wrecked the economy.

Below is a summary of key changes.

The NHS is required to find £20 billion in efficiency savings through the Quality Innovation Productivity and Prevention programme (QIPP).

Putting patients and the public first:

Information on “quality of care” must be readily available to facilitate better patient choice. This will result in the production of league tables,

Under this scheme there is no onus for bracketing the type of case mix which could result in spurious data as hospitals with sicker patients will have worse outcomes.

Local Health Commissioners will be able to impose fines on poor performers according to a prescriptive list produced by the department of health. This will create a risk averse culture that will undermine health provision and could also lead to contrived reports.

Hospitals will be allowed to undercut each other and fixed tariffs will be removed, Evidence supports such schemes decrease quality of care.

Every patient will have access to an open list permitting them to join with any GP Practice. Problems associated with this include:

• Competition will favour larger organisations – removing local aspect to service.
• Doctors no longer able to focus on good service as they will have to work on business aspects such as marketing.
• Lower cost service could mean poorer quality an increasingly competitive market.

Personal health budgets:

WHAT THIS MEANS: Confusion about who is commissioning, the patient or the GP consortia. Possibility of inequity if rich patients can “top up” their care budget

Developing the “Quality Outcomes Framework”:

The National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) will develop quality standards for the NHS commissioning board. NICE are expected to develop 150 standards in next five years, Stroke, Dementia and prevention of VTE already produced. NICE will also develop quality standards for social care.

Will resources be available to implement the budget? Moreover, has a budget been created to allow acclimatisation?

Autonomy Accountability and Democratic Legitimacy:

The NHS commissioning board (NHSCB) will calculate budgets for local GP practices and will allocate these directly to consortia. Consortia will be held to account by the NHSCB. There is only one board for whole country, which will no doubt lead to a lack of understanding of local needs, quirks and demographics. A one size fits all approach. The existing Strategic Health Authority (SHA) and Primary Care Trust (PCT) structure is to be abolished.

Currently there are 11 SHA’s for England covering the regions. One exists for London all Primary Care Trusts (PCT) are accountable to their designated SHA. The Equity and Excellence bill threatens to remove both tiers of authority – PCT’s and SHAs. They will be replaced by the National Commissioning Board responsible for managing individual contracts with GP practices, dentists, pharmacists and optometrists as well as managing the agreements with GP Commissioning Consortia. GP Practices will be allocated to Consortia if they have not already joined. This programme is scheduled to go live in April 2012.

It is likely that there will be regional offices of the National Commissioning Board but this will mean a London office with responsibility for contracts with around 1000 GP practices. The existing relationship between PCT’s and practices needs improvement. However, there is understanding of the local community. A more distant relationship with a London office of the Board and GP practices will ensue in a colder bleak new world of health.

The Coalition Government believe that GP’s only need light touch regulation because patients can use choice to vote with their feet, if they are unhappy with their GP practice. Vulnerable groups who are most in need of a good GP practice are the least likely to be able or willing to shop around for a new GP!

GP commissioning consortia will be able to choose which services they commission themselves and for which activities they may choose to buy in support from external organisations.

It is a frightening observation that already some PCT’s are already reorganising before the Bill is ratified. It would seem the process is already a done deal!

NOTE: Changes welcomed by UnitedHealth Group President Simon Stevens “But the new plans go much further (than Labour’s reforms) – on consumer choice, pro-competitive market regulation and the severing of day-to-day political control of the NHS.” Financial Times July 15th

GP Consortia will receive a maximum management allowance to reflect the costs associated with commissioning. It is not clear how much will be allocated to consortiums, or if they much previous PCT budgets?

Shadow GP Consortia are to be in place by April 2011 (Tower Hamlets are in process of electing our shadow board). PCT’s will continue to operate till April 2013, then they will cease to exist. In the interim they will support GP consortia as they take on increasing responsibilities for commissioning. There is a high risk that we lose good PCT staff. Furthermore, what cost implications will arise from the two groups working in tandem from 2011 – 2013?

The govt will not bail out consortia who fail

Consortia will be free to buy services from any willing provider and providers will compete to provide services.

A new “Healthwatch” body will created as a new consumer champion. They will be able to investigate poor service.

This body will limit the ability of the Secretary of State to intervene in NHS operation. This allows politicians to deflect blame when things go wrong?

There will also be a significant devolution of power from the Health Secretary to the NHS commissioning board who will be responsible to monitor the regulator “Care Quality Commission” and the GP Commissioning Consortia.

WHAT THIS MEANS: The Secretary of State for Health no longer has day to day responsibility for running the NHS or particular hospitals or commissioning consortia. They can sink or swim. If they sink, then they get taken over by the private sector. Besides, this is there not need for an overriding vision.

Freeing existing NHS providers:

All NHS trusts are required to become foundation trusts within 3 years. Employees have the opportunity to run them as employee lead social enterprises. Where will the overall vision come from?

This could bring about a move away from national pay and conditions. Foundation Trusts are already able to determine pay for their own staff. Employers would also be responsible for leading negotiations on new employment contracts”. The BMA have already rejected the national pay freeze.

There will also be a removal of the cap on how much foundation trusts can earn from other sources e.g. private patients. This could result in the squeezing out of NHS Patients by more lucrative paying patients.

Foundation Trusts could more easily merge, creating monopolies that would be bad for competition. It is rumoured that talks for a Whipps Cross Hospital merger are advancing as this article is being written.

A monitoring body is to be set up to regulate economically all providers of primary care from April 2013. They will also be responsible for licensing NHS providers, who will not be able to practice without a license. Will such an operation not require significant new funding…?

The Care Quality Commission will inspect providers. They will make judgement against NICE standards. Providers can be shut down for failing to reach quality standards as well as for financial failure. This may cause the loss of many local facilities not able to gear up to the change, due to logistical and operational burden and lack of support and funding.

Friday, 14 January 2011

King George Hospital Protest 29th January 2011



We are holding a protest against the potential closure of A&E at King George Hospital. Read more here:

http://chadwellgreen.blogspot.com/2010/12/king-george-debacle.html
The event is being supported by the National Keep the NHS Public group and attendees will be coming from all over London and wider in the UK including Welwyn Garden City/Hatfield and Southend. We would be most impressed if you or a representative would join us on a matter that is important for a place like London with a rapidly increasing population. The fact is that any loss of A&E in London or anywhere else in the UK will impact on peoples safety and health (a correlation between increased fatality and emergency journey times has been made by the Emergency Medicine journal). Some of the issues include poor transport links to alternative hospitals such as the Journey form Ilford to Queens Hospital , Overburdened A&E facilities without the infrastructure for increased patients and Growing local populations threatening excessive hospital burden.

We would like to make this protest one that highlights the need to preserve London and wider UK based A&E facilities and to urge the existing government to refrain from any budget/service cuts to the essential NHS. Your attendance with a short address could make this a campaign of worthy note - please also cascade details through your existing networks . It is our intention to submit a petition to Andrew Lansley calling for him to make a decision to terminate the existing poorly designed proposals. Moreover we would also like this to be a chance for your organisation to make this a starting point for local protests across The UK in opposition to the dastardly Health White Paper that threatens to privatise our National Health Service

Please inform us if you or a representative can speak at the event and do cascade details through your wider network. Seven Kings and Barking Gurdwara will be providing free food and beverages at the event.

Speakers include;

GLA Member Darren Johnson
MP Lee Scott - Opening Speech
Cllr Keith Prince - Leader of the Council
Cllr Ross Hatfull Health Scrutiny Panel
Jim Fagan - Keep the NHS Public Waltham Forest
Frank Wood - UNITE NEC Trade union Office
Norman Traub - Southend Against The Cuts
Raj ChananVHP Ilford Hindu Centre
Shahid Dastigir Khan - Pakistan tehreek-e- insaaf
Upkar Rai - British Sikh Council and Vice President Seven King Gurdwara
Brian Davison – Borough Dean United free Church
Wilson Chowdhry -British Pakistani Christian Association

Media attention has been very positive including air time on TIME FM and the following news stories:

Here is what the Romford Recorder said:

http://www.romfordrecorder.co.uk/news/protest_at_queen_s_hospital_plan_1_760629

Barking and Dagenham Post:

http://www.bdpost.co.uk/home/protest_organised_against_proposed_ward_closures_at_king_george_hospital_1_763119


Wanstead and Woodford Guardian

http://www.bdpost.co.uk/home/protest_organised_against_proposed_ward_closures_at_king_george_hospital_1_763119

Yellow Advertiser:

http://edition.pagesuite-professional.co.uk/launch.aspx?referral=other&bypass=true&pnum=&refresh=6b0WG13q5Np1&EID=1023de2a-f908-4b10-83ad-a5cba1b94280&skip=

and:

http://edition.pagesuite-professional.co.uk/launch.aspx?referral=other&bypass=true&pnum=&refresh=6b0WG13q5Np1&EID=1023de2a-f908-4b10-83ad-a5cba1b94280&skip=

Please sign our online Petition:

http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/save-king-george-hospital/

Redbridge Neighbourhood Watch Association AGM.

From left Lisa Cherry (Borough Watch Commander), Karen Campbell (RNWA Secretary), Inspector Darville, Isla Martin (RNWA Treasurer). The RNWA handed over names for over 50 new applicants wishing to join or initiate a Neighbourhood Watch Group.

Last night Police chiefs and the executive of the RNWA sat down around a table, to discuss the agenda for the long awaited RNWA AGM.

Good news is the programme is set and we can look forward to an exciting programme that will be held at Valentines Mansion on the 25th January 2011 from 19:00.

We will be handing out some of the Crime prevention devices we purchased recently and boxes of white paper to assist groups with printing local newsletters.

Food will be available and an invite is open for any Neighbourhood Watch Coordinators in the Borough to come and join us.

Unlike previous events we expect to finish the meeting at 21:00- so please do arrive promptly.
In the picture at the top of this post it can be seen that the RNWA are handing over over 50 named applicants wishing to initiate or join a local Neighbourhood Watch. This was achieved by a series of 3 Barbecues/picnics across the borough. Read more about the event in Woodford here:
We intend to hold a similar barbecue in Chadwell in March, so be prepared....

Thursday, 16 December 2010

King George Debacle



Last night our hospital chiefs and doctors made a decision to proceed forward with plans to terminate A&E facility at King George Hospital. Dr Mike Gill who attended the meeting we arranged in Somerville Hall in Chadwell has spoken in favour of the termination. Read more here:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-12001397

and here:

http://www.ilfordrecorder.co.uk/news/news/breaking_news_redbridge_hospital_s_a_e_and_labour_ward_will_close_1_754550

We have organised a protest on the 29th of January that will leave from Little Heath Green and end up in Ilford Town Centre.

The event will start at 12:00 at Little Heath Green (near hospital) and will hopefully arrive at 14:00 in Ilford Town Centre. Please aim to arrive for 11:00!

If you would like to join the planning committee please make contact.

Our first planning meeting will be held on the 4th January 2011 at 19:00. Come to 57 Green Lane Ilford.

Please sign our petition:

http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/save-king-george-hospital/

Read about attempts by the Local PCT to reduce the service by stealth. When my wife was hit in the eye with firework she was sent to Whipps Cross, instead of King George Hospital. This extended the journey time by over 30 minutes, whilst she was in agonising pain:

http://www.guardian-series.co.uk/news/8635785.REDBRIDGE__Response_times_concern_health_campaigners/

Monday, 6 December 2010

Don't believe the hype - train delays are awful during the recent big chills!


Despite what you hear in our popular and mainstream media train services have been extremely delayed during the recent snowfall.  On Thursday trains were delayed by over 40 minutes on the service form Ilford to Liverpool Street.  Moreover the train due at 10:45 stopped at Manor Park as it ran out of air.  Passengers were made to sit on the train for around 20 minutes and then advised that they would have to leave the train and wait for a train behind. 

No explanation was provided regrading the need for air, nor was it made clear why or how the air was lost.  In fact the public address voice seemed surprised and inexperienced in how to cope with the incident.  He made  a joke in poor taste "Don't worry it's not that bad - at least your not stranded here..ha ha", that did not go down well with passengers.

Passengers were made to wait for approximately 20 minutes in the cold of the outdoors while waiting for the next train.  I and my daughter were passengers on this service as we were invited to attend Lambeth Palace the home of the Archbishop of Canterbury, to discuss the work I do with the British Pakistani Christian Association with Reverend Rana Khan (one of his resident administrators).

Our advice to other local people is be wary of overground service they are more prone to delay during the winter freezes we are experiencing in recent times.  Moreover wrap up warm as you may be asked to exit and enter onto another train and the heating in the carriages does not seem to be working ?

Being a rather inquisitive fellow I looked into possible reasons behind the loss of air in the trains, which I assume is for the working of the doors, pistons and brakes.  On inspection of the tubes that cascade between carriages I noticed icicles had formed on the rubber cabling.  Perhaps the ice had ruptured the cables...?



Whatever the reasons, lets hope the rail companies find a way to avert any future incidents of a similar nature.  As the cold weather is unbearable enough without adverse events such as these that left my poor Naomi and I sporting colds for the entire weekend!!!

Click this link to check how rail and tube services are operating daily:

http://www.tfl.gov.uk/

Wednesday, 1 December 2010

The Big Society

Wilson Chowdhry and Natasha Plummer form the MPA

I was invited to attend a "Community Safety and the Big Society Interactive Workshop" on the 30th November 2010.   The long title in tanden with the new fangled concept stimulated my interest and intrigue.... 

As a consequence, I responded to the request and booked my place at the venue Metropolitan Police Authority building, opposite Scotland Yard.

During that day we were led through a new philosphy promoted by the existing coalition government.
The aim of the concept is best described by them:

"Our Conservative - Liberal Democrat Government has come together with a driving ambition: to put more power and opportunity into people’s hands"

Moreover the ethos has 5 main objectives:

1.Give communities more powers
2.Encourage people to take an active role in their communities
3.Transfer power from central to local government
4.Support co-ops, mutuals, charities and social enterprises
5.Publish government data.

During the workshop the attendees were split into groups and were taken through excersies and case studies, reflecting on the key principles and aims of the scheme and how they would manifest in a tangible, workable forms. 
Participation (in line with objective 2) was encouraged and each case study was supported by a holistic feedback and brain storm session. 

The set up was good, the program for the day was well timed and stimulating.  Overall the day was rather pleasant for each participant.  

Some of the topics discussed were:

  • Potential cultural changes to the Public sector that could enhance or support Big Society - ideas included improved feedback and less haughtiness from the public sector.
  • How to engage with business - ideas included incentivising participation and recognition.
  • Encouraging Diversity - ideas included exhibitions targetting specifuc ethnic groups.
  • How could the government support the third sector - ideas included, better funding, recognition, network facilitation, creating community hubs (locations where front line services could be accessed in close proximity).  Staying with schemes for longer was another suggestion.
The debate was obviously much wider then the few matters highlighted above.  What came out of the event was a firm belief that the Big Society already existed.  However, most agreed that think tanks like the one provided, allowed for better information exchange and for an opportunity to refine best practice.  Moreover the philosophy if promulgated well, would promote a more joined up approach in communities.

As always, I like many others was concerned about how the results of the event would be used and whether any feedback mechanism would be established.  I was informed that all attendees would be provided with a summary of the findings and I hope to publish that in my blog when received.

In the meanwhile the Big Society paradigm has definitely gained my favour - lets us see where it takes us.

Learn more about Big Society here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Society

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-10680062

http://thebigsociety.co.uk/

http://www.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/media/407789/building-big-society.pdf

Keep our NHS Safe!

Wilson with the enchanting MP Caroline Lucas (Leader of the Green Party- we are not worthy!)
Images of Room 14 in Parliament House (a small debate room - almost the same size as our local council chamber...!)
It was surreal experience being in a place of such authority.
At the end of a productive meeting!
Pictures could not be taken through most of the House, but the main area though plain in design had a striking full beamed roof and seeped with reverberating power.

 Yeah that's me - oh and behind me you can see that even politicians get into festive mood!
 Some of the non-photograph areas had ornate finishings, here is one area in the photograph area that indicates the elaborate and exquisite detail that pervades the house.
Imagine this view as you left your place of work....

Wendy Savage from Keep our NHS Public in conjunction with Jeremy Corbyn MP, Gail Cartmail, (Unite); Jacky Davis, (NHS Consultants’ Association); Caroline Lucas MP, and  Jonathon Tomlinson, (Hackney GP), organised an important seminar on The White paper on Health Equity and Excellence: Liberating the NHS published on 12 July 2010.  Keep NHS Public state that the paper "poses a major threat to the NHS"  This paper is being pushed through by our ConDem coalition Government. 

The seminar raised much heated  discussion - all those in attendance agreed that a priority for the campaign against the White Paper, was to organise a parliamentary group of opposition MP's who would spearhead a challenge and be our voice in Parliament.. 

Despite several searches, I noted MP Mike Gapes was missing and was disillusioned by this. It was however, amusing and rather alarming, when a member of the public insinuated that our Labour MP's might not be opposed to the plan.  This assumption was based on the program of attrition by stealth, that has been imposed upon the NHS under the previous Government.  They outsourced much of the minor treatments to private "treatment centres"  during their last term in power.  Moreover their disastrous "Private Finance Initiative" (PFI) has resulted in our NHS being indebited to private companies.  All of whom, seek profit by charging extortionate interest on property "leased" through these agreements.  The deal is made more sordid when you consider the buildings will eventually return to the more wealthy landlords with even bigger assets! 

The white paper is attempting to terminate the existing NHS structure and subvert the work of the PCT, whilst creating new practitioner consortiums.  The medical elite will soon be paid even more to run their own private NHS businesses.  This bodes ill for the future of the NHS and can only be a huge step towards extinction of our much loved publicly owned NHS.

What future are we leaving our offspring?  Ramped up student loans and expensive further education costs, Private medical health, increased crime a consequence of reduced policing, and no real jobs to fund any of the above!

Caroline Lucas MP Leader of the Green Party attended the event.  She has kindly reproduced her final address at the seminar (sic):

Speech for Keep our NHS Public seminar – November 2010



Green Party response to White Paper


Thank you and I appreciate this opportunity to give you an overview of my Party’s response to the Health White Paper, a Paper I think we are all agreed makes clear the coalition’s intention to forge ahead with the commercialisation of the health service.

The previous government took us some considerable way in this direction and there is already significant evidence that such an approach does not benefit patients or the NHS. For example, a 2010 National Audit Office report questioned the long-term value for money of PFI hospital contracts and found that the lack of flexibility in repaying debts could make it difficult for trusts to make savings without cutting back on services.


Increasing the role of the market in the NHS will not make it more efficient, nor make the NHS more responsive to patients needs.


Instead, an increased role for the market will fragment care and increase the costs of provision.


As any economist will tell you, markets need mechanisms to operate. For the NHS, that means increasing the number of managers and accountants, which will result in a cut in front line services, just the opposite of what Andrew Lansley has announced he wants.


By expanding the role of the market, handing powers to consortia of GPs, privatising hospitals, and scrapping important targets, the Secretary of State for Health is creating the perfect conditions for high costs, poor practice, unaccountability and long waiting lists.

Colleagues will be aware that the coalition’s plan for GP commissioning is one aspect of the proposed reforms that has attracted considerable attention – and controversy. Much has been said about the conflict of interest of GP provided services being commissioned by GPs. We endorse this concern.

We also consider that increasing the number of commissioning bodies will increase administration costs. There is no reason to believe that a threefold increase in the number of commissioning organisations will not lead to a threefold increase in administrative costs. These increased costs will reduce the amount of money available for front line care – despite promises to protect that care.

Increasing the number of commissioning bodies will also serve to dilute health care planning skills. Whilst some GPs may have these skills, overall they are in short supply and neither the proposed structure nor the existing structure addresses this problem.


Health care planning skills have also changed over the past two decades to become a contracting function, reducing the need to understand health and increasing the need to understand trading – again GPs are not best placed to fulfil this role and the expectation is that many will instead form consortia.


We believe that the risk here is of secondary and tertiary care consultants and other clinical colleagues being excluded from the decision making process, and of financial outcomes taking priority over the best clinical outcomes.


Moreover, planning on a small scale is commensurately harder than planning on a wider one and with the dilution of this skill across commissioners, the likelihood of poor planning may well increase.


Training and education also benefits from a broad overview of workforce requirements – as the British Medical Association point out “increased reliance on local planning and management of education and training” could result in “further instability to patient care”.


And what happens if GP consortia, for example, fail. The white paper states that there will be no bail outs, but not what will happen instead. Will they be replaced with another consortium composed of exactly the same GPs? How will patients access services in a true business model if their local hospital is not funded? Again, this makes planning hugely complex and, without a system wide approach to ensuring continuity of health care provision, there is a very real danger that poorer areas will suffer drastic reductions in provision.


Increasing the number of commissioning bodies will also introduce instability into an NHS that is already facing a huge financial challenge – in the shape of £20bn of cuts.


And despite what the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats tell you neither will it end the current post code lottery by reducing the variation in services across the country. On the contrary - the proposed changes will increase the level of local decision making that directly leads to this so called lottery, and the White Paper lacks any assurances or policies about how this will be avoided.

Indeed despite being highly critical of the fact that some people are denied health care that they might receive if they lived in a neighbouring town, the White Paper contains no concrete proposals to resolve the problem.


Implicit with increasing the post code lottery and with the introduction of the business model for providers is the creation of a two tier NHS. More affluent people will be able to top up care whereas poorer people will not.


This, as we know, is dressed up as offering patients more choice. Choice underpins the government’s plans for a market in the NHS, despite all the evidence showing that what patients really want is access to good local services. In other words, although the very concept of the market is based on a principle that is fundamentally flawed we are being sold it anyway.


The market approach to health care is as indelibly and comprehensively embedded in this White Paper as the words through a stick of Brighton rock.

GP commissioning will result in increased spending on private companies providing commissioning support and this is combined with the move to a fully privatised / social enterprised NHS.


The Green Party is fundamentally opposed to the concept of the market approach to health care. We believe that health care should be a public service based on collaboration and cooperation between health professionals and their patients, rather than a competitive purchasing based system that relies on a range of businesses to provide health care.


Expansion of the market will increase cherry picking of care and damage core providers such as hospitals. Private providers are primarily concerned with profit rather than patient care or training professionals. It is wrong for taxpayer’s money to go into the pockets of shareholders, especially when it is done at the detriment of our NHS.

There is also no indication about how core services will be protected. We are concerned the local people should continue to have care at the point of need and that care should be provided locally, as patients are often unable to travel long distances.


We also believe that a market based approach will significantly reduce transparency and accountability. Introducing local government involvement in public health is welcome but the rest of health care provision and commissioning is being moved even further from democratic mandate. This is a core weakness in the white paper.


Tellingly Andrew Lansley does not have the backing of the health profession, many of whom fear the fragmentation of the NHS and have raised concerns that the biggest shake up since its inception will not result in better patient care. There is also the continuing uncertainty over ideas such as allowing hospitals to compete for patients on a cost of treatment basis – a dangerous move which will effectively privatise, not just commericalise, hospitals.


The Health Secretary’s announcement today on public health - including plans to tackle obesity, repackage cigarettes, introduce minimum pricing for alcohol and increase physical activity – is sadly lacking in detail or much of a budget, just 4 billion, a tiny proportion of the NHS overall spend. However, it is crucial that health promotion becomes much more of a priority and that the various white papers are properly integrated to put people’s health first.


Before finishing I’d just like to very briefly flag one further concern the Green Party has with the Health White Paper - the suggestion of local pay negotiations and bargaining. This will be hugely damaging, both in terms of medical staff’s terms and conditions and in the knock on effect for patient care if market forces are allowed to dictate quality and quantity of provision.


As is often the nature of responding to someone else’s proposals it is all too easy to focus on what is wrong – and not put forward alternatives. I hope however, that you are left in doubt that the Green Party does have a clear alternative to the proposals laid out in this White Paper. It is called a publicly funded, publicly provided health service – a national health service.