Dulwich/West Norwood targeted as battleground to resist Dismantling of NHS

[Youngbloodtim]

Got this today from 38degrees:

The government?s plans to privatise and fragment our NHS are taking shape in Dulwich and West Norwood.

Local doctors are forming a Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG) for the area. They?re going to get new powers to decide what health services you and your neighbours are able to access and who provides them. [1]

Whether it?s treatment for diabetes, skin conditions, a broken arm or depression, profit-hungry companies like Virgin Care and Serco are circling, ready to bid for contracts by promising to slash costs. [2]

The doctors on your local CCG will be under pressure from the government to hand out contracts to private companies. That could put vital services at risk. [3] But the last thing most doctors want is to carve up our NHS for private profit. Plus, the new CCG has a legal duty to listen to local people. [4]

So right now, we?ve got a big chance to ask local doctors to use their new powers to protect our NHS, not privatise it. Together, we can make sure they hear from hundreds of local people as they make these crucial decisions.

Can you add your name to the petition to your local CCG now?

https://secure.38degrees.org.uk/CCG-petition

Donations from 38 Degrees members have funded lawyers to prepare robust wording for CCGs to write into their constitutions - protecting our NHS from the worst risks of the government's plans. [5]

If we can get in early, while CCGs are still being formed, we can give doctors a better choice - one based on sound legal advice and the interests of patients, not private companies.

38 Degrees members will be able to work together to persuade their local CCG to write these safeguards into their constitutions. The government and the private health industry probably won?t like it at all, but there?s little they can do to stop people power.

First things first. Can you add your name to the petition in Dulwich and West Norwood?

https://secure.38degrees.org.uk/CCG-petition

Thanks for being involved,

Becky, Marie, Robin, Ian and the 38 Degrees team

PS: The website tool that links you up with your local CCG is new - you?re one of the first to test it. If you have any problems or questions, please let us know by emailing: [email protected]

NOTES

[1] GP Online: GP and CCG relations: what are the challenges? http://insidecommissioning.gponline.com/2012/08/02/gp-and-ccg-relations-what-are-the-challenges/

[2] "Virgin Care...will take over integrated children's services in the south-west in March 2013 and will run frontline services for three years. Critics have warned that such deals herald the breakup of the NHS, with private firms cherrypicking services." Guardian: Virgin Care to take over children's health services in Devon http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2012/jul/12/virgin-care-children-nhs-devon

GP Online: Services open to ?any qualified provider? revealed by DH http://www.gponline.com/channel/news/article/1149786/services-open-any-qualified-provider-revealed-dh/

[3] ?...plans for a radical restructuring of the health service in England, which will give GPs control of much of the NHS's ?106bn annual budget, cut the number of health bodies, and introduce more competition into services? Guardian: NHS Reform Health bill passes vote

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2012/mar/20/nhs-reform-health-bill-passes-vote

BBC: NHS - The shape of things to come http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-17457102

[4] Telegraph: Scrap NHS Bill, say doctors who will run reforms http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/9112448/Scrap-NHS-Bill-say-doctors-who-will-run-reforms.html

Pulse: More GP commissioners withdraw support from health bill http://www.pulsetoday.co.uk/newsarticle-content/-/article_display_list/13604675/more-gp-commissioners-withdraw-support-from-health-bill

[5] 38 Degrees blog: Top legal advice to save our NHS http://blog.38degrees.org.uk/2012/09/21/top-legal-advice-to-save-our-nhs/

[Loz]

I always laugh at the 38 Degrees name. In their own words: "38 Degrees is the angle at which an avalanche happens."

Delightfully stupid.

[ianr]

"Can't see the a campaign you think we should be running here? Let us know." http://www.38degrees.org.uk/campaigns

[Huguenot]

I can't make out what these guys want, what they do, what they intend to achieve or whether there is any logical reason to support them.

The website is so vague it makes Sarah Palin look decisive and well informed.

[KalamityKel]

It's hardly new news either

[Penguin68]

GPs have always been 'private' - in that they are partnerships (or businesses) which are owned privately (e.g. by the doctors) who can sell the partnerships and (very frequently) own the property (surgeries etc.) where the business is undertaken. They contract to the National Health Service to provide GP services to a given locale. GPs neither 'work' directly for the NHS nor are their surgeries in the main owned by the NHS. They do work 'within' the NHS - in that their services are (mainly) free to the user at the point of delivery as part of the NHS 'contract' with the public.

Ancilliary medical staff (practice nurses etc.) and clerical staff are employed by the GP partnerships, not directly by the NHS. District nurses (who may work out of GP practices) are, I believe however directly employed by the NHS, as are Health Visitors (but I stand to be corrected over that). Partnerships may also employ locum and salaried doctors - who do not have a financial stake in, nor can benefit from profits from the partnership. Often these non-partner doctors are relatively poorly paid compared with the partnership GPs/ beneficial owners.

It always amuses me to hear talk of 'privatisation' in the NHS with reference to GPs - they have never been anything but private contractors supplying the NHS to given contracts. Most (but not all) GPs derive all their incomes from NHS contracts although some also, e.g. run commercial pharamcy services as well.

All that is happening is that significantly large commercial businesses are moving in to an area previously supplied by small (commercial) 'cottage' businesses, albeit with the support of a huge government department and apparatus.

[Youngbloodtim]

Then why are the health professionals generally opposed to it?

[Burbage]

If health professionals are generally opposed to privatisation, then they can probably be trusted to run the CCGs accordingly. The only difference between then and now is that from now it will be health professionals doing the commissioning, rather than faceless beancounters.

What you intended to write, I suspect, is that the hospital trusts, after a decade of fighting over services with their neighbours, are nervous of having to fight with a new bunch of providers, especially now quality, speed and cost are likely to become factors rather than the size of the 'patients forum' or the number of leaflets they shift.

In any case, if health professionals are so against privatisation, how is it that hospitals have happily been hiring up to half their beds to the private trade? Although we only learnt of that this year, it seems to have been going on a lot longer than the coalition, so either they the professionals are as much a bunch of mendacious, profiteering scum as Virgin and Serco, or Labour was a lot more evil than we thought.

[LadyDeliah]

I think lumping Trust managers in with doctors, nurses etc as being health professionals in your analysis Burbage, misses the point.

[Huguenot]

It's bonkers to imagine that hospitals can be run by doctors and nurses, they're taught medicine not administration of the healthcare business. If the trust managers are professionals in the healthcare industry, then they are healthcare professionals.

It's also a bit rude and belittling.

This 'snobbery' that unless you directly administer medical aid you are unnecessary in healthcare is plain daft.

It may well be that there is too much bureaucracy in the NHS, but that doesn't mean it can be rejected altogether.

[LadyDeliah]

That's your interpretation of what I've written Hugo, but not actually what I have said.

I pointed out that the OP was unlikely to have intended to include Trust managers in his definition of health professionals and to include them would distort the point he was trying to make.

Simples.

[first mate]

Many NHS managers have had medical backgrounds whether as nurses or doctors, so I think the territory is a lot more grey than is made out. However, most doctors surgeries already seem so overloaded that I am not sure how they are going to manage this additional layer of responsibility.

Who will provide the evidence base to CGS' on which they take decisions as to what treatments/interventions/drugs should and should not be made available to their client base?

[DaveR]

It's such a stupid, lazy assumption that employing a private business to deliver public services = a bad thing. Private businesses employ millions of people in the UK and already provide all sorts of essential services. I would be livid if my GP decided where to source services on political rather than clinical grounds, but that's what this campaign is all about.