NHS legal review – update on our crack legal team!

I know this is thinking way ahead, but my gut feeling is that as it is clear that the current government want to privatise  – even with a campaign showing this to be the case – any legal opinion showing this to be the case could merely confirm we already know already. 

What we need is clear procedural advice, don’t we? What bits of the law/ legislation is available to us to protect and retain the NHS? Doctors can be bought, suppliers don’t care and will scent a bonanza (that’s really how competition works)…patients may not think too clearly about using a private provider if put under pressure and feeling desperate….what legal rights have they to refuse…

Somewhere down the line, if the worst comes to the worst , at some point, campaigners will also need to know how to re-position any privatised element so that it can be returned to the public-sector when and if we ever get the chance. I write this because tendering is already taking place and governments of whatever hue might be too scared, too dim, or too inert, to challenge private contractors and EU law.

What Lucy Neville has said is  right I worked for the NHS for 32 yrs I saw at lest 16 major changes, extensively were mad in the name of progress.Big upheavals every 2 yrs, great for breaking moral and becoming dysfunctional. They have been working at breaking the NHS up for a long time.We must be ahead( I was going to say game ) This is not a game, If we want our Health Service

Hi Lucy and Philip, that’s a really important point. Because there are so many amendments to the plans its critical that we work through them all and get to the bottom of what the government is planning. Then using that as a foundation we can do what you suggest by drafting amendments to protect retain the NHS.

We’ll update the blog with updates  from the lawyers as soon as we can

My MP raises two important points. 1 There has been no changes to the essential Impact  assessment which contans a large number of unknowns & 2 When the Bill comes back to Paeliament the have only two days to debate.

It’s too late for the south-west. What we need are lawyers to decide if staff consultation has been adequate over the social enterprise transfers of the S-W PCTs. We understand that public consultation was not a prescribed legal requirement -so go for the staff consultation route!  We know it has been inadequate and no PCTs started any consultation with staff untill the decision to opt out of the NHS had already been taken. This is, in part, due to Sir Ian Carruthers vision of a competitive NHS – he is, after all, a Govt advisor. We wish you could save us from leaving the NHS and therefore ensure our counties have a stronger base for bargaining when/if the time comes. SETs are being set up to fail

It’s too late for the south-west. What we need are lawyers to decide if staff consultation has been adequate over the social enterprise transfers of the S-W PCTs. We understand that public consultation was not a prescribed legal requirement -so go for the staff consultation route!  We know it has been inadequate and no PCTs started any consultation with staff untill the decision to opt out of the NHS had already been taken. This is, in part, due to Sir Ian Carruthers vision of a competitive NHS – he is, after all, a Govt advisor. We wish you could save us from leaving the NHS and therefore ensure our counties have a stronger base for bargaining when/if the time comes. SETs are being set up to fail

Hi I think the patients will be put at risk, if they have their way of doing as they please. I spent some time in Peterborough City Hospital. There was 2 nurses on at night and 3 in the day if we were lucky. I have not heard of anyone liking this new Hospital.The staff is nice but the PCH is awful. The corridors are so long you need to catch a bus too get to each lift.     

Apparently there has been concerns that GPs are being encouraged not to refer to save money. There is also a disincentive to diagnose.
Please could we address the contractual relationship between patient and health provider too.
Presumably the issue of medical negligence would remain?

Little has been mentioned of the fiasco concerning the phasing-out of paper Health Records and the implementation of an electronic Record. Already, privately owned scanning companies are scanning paper Health Records.  ”So what?” you may ask. Well the answer is a couple of questions.  What benefit is this to the average patient?  What is the financial cost? How many people outside the NHS will see your record before it is scanned? How can you be sure your Health Record on screen will match the original hard copy?  Private companies in the IT section drool at the chance of a Government contract because those who order the software (in this case Tony Blair’s Cabinet ) don’t have a clue about IT. Six billion GBP and counting was the last estimated figure for this drain on the NHS, which was installed without consultation with the electorate.

Please can I again draw attention to the book called The Plot Against the NHS which shows how as far back as the early Blair Government Tony Blair and Alan Milbourne were aiming to ‘marketise’ the NHS.  The book shows exactly how this trick was pulled, disguised and apparently misrepresented to parliament and to the people of this country.  It shows how the private health corporations saw the contributions we make to pay for the NHS as a rich mine to be exploited, turning us into something like a greenfly farm for the ants to plunder.  It also shows clearly how so many of the ministers and people engaged in managing the NHS were also in fact associated with the Health Companies they sought to engage.  It is not a happy read, indeed it is disillusioning and sickening, but it claims that the behaviour of those who allowed false impressions to be believed could have been acting unconstitutionally, which may mean, surely, that the resulting decisions could be invalid?  How one wishes this could be so.  If you read this book, you will understand much more than you want to, probably, about how the system has been worked towards turning the NHS into a cover for private health insurance and care, following the unsavoury pattern of the American system, as has been used for care for the elderly, and now proving to be oh so very not what we want and nor what we have paid for through the years.

This is just another case of cash for the poor lawyers in our society…………. why does democracy need lawyers?

This government was elected? on a raft of lies, so therefore the financial crisis gave it the opportunity to do what tory governments have tried to do for decades.  Every time they came into power, they ran the NHS down and tried to privatise it.  If they succeed this time,  we could all end up paying for our own medical health though an insurance like the Americans.  Do not trust the tories.   

The government has been trying to open up the NHS to a gradual privatisation for a while now, if left alone, they will succeed. If one looks back in the past everything that the government has privatised has come back to bit the public on the bum with ever increasing prices to pay shareholders. in my opinion that is exactly the same thing that will happen to the NHS if we as past and present national insurance payers allow it to happen. I am convinced that a majority of the british public will not even be aware of this  until it actually happens 

Because, without lawyers, the law will not be applied if it suits management not to bother.

The NHS Bill schedule puts the NHS at high immediate risk -  it’s hanging from a thread of survival !   3rd reading in 9 days time !

38Degrees & all supporters, AND new supporters from the other 60 million + of the population who do not yet participate, must make so much noise that the ConDem walls fall down .

The LibDems  should be awoken from their ignorant slumber.   It will be too late when they are losing seats in all directions in 2015.  Shame about the good LibDem MPs who might lose out  -  hopefully not Andrew George who has forever been proclaiming loud & clear of the danger to the NHS.

Can we via 38Degrees flood all the Lib Dem MPs’ email inboxes with our views of how treacherous we see their power seeking behaviour.   And they will have performed an unforgiveable , contemptible  and unforgettable act if they do not vote this Conservative treachery out.   All labour MPs of the Blairite Nu Labour tendency are not innocent either .

My cousin in Canada sent me this, concerning medical emergency treatment for her grandson who lives in the U.S.  It is quite shocking and reflects what may gradually happen here if the (mandateless) NHS bill is passed.”Late Wednesday afternoon, J (grandson who lives in
the U.S.) cut himself very badly, carving with one of B’s (grandad) tools.   We thought it wiser for J to be
seen by a doctor, which in our area from hell, meant the nearest hospital 40 kms
away.  J had 4 stitches done to close the cut, and an xray taken to make sure
there were no fracture to the bones.  This normal occurence to a 14 year old
young man is NOT the end of the story.  “Being residents of the USA, our Medicare
does not cover their medical requirements here.  Jo (dad) has FULL medical
coverage for himself and his family, and A (mum) had all the proof of this
coverage.  She also has [various bank cards].  The bill for J was $1,000.00 dollars!!!!!”Medical
treatment was withheld until ‘hospital administrative charges’ were paid
($540.00) with the rest to be paid before J could leave the hospital (they
with-held J’s passport).  The hospital would NOT accept their medical insurrance
or any of A’s credit cards.  B and A went to the nearest bank the only type of bank in these backwards towns to try and get CASH. 
A’s USA bank would NOT accept the amount she wanted (it wasn’t in her profile)
and the Caisse only accepted certain cards which A did not have!  She then burst
into tears.  After much discussion and tears, the Caisse decided B could
withdraw that amount of money from his Canadian VISA account.  He and A returned
to the hospital, paid the bitches and J was stitched-up.  They did not get back
to Mandeville until 12:00 AM.  I (grandma) had stayed behind with Br (younger
brother) and we kept each others’ spirits up.  The cells phone were active
between B, myself and Jo who was in Chicago on business.  “DO THESE HOSPITALS LET
VISITORS TO OUR COUNTRY DIE IF THEY DO NOT HAVE CASH TO PAY FOR TREATMENT?  WHAT
IF THEY ARE UNCONSCIOUS WHEN THEY TAKEN TO A HOSPITAL????  There has to be
better communicative methods to get proper help in such emergency
situations!!!!!! “

reply from my MP:

Dear Mr Gamester

Thank you for your email of today’s date regarding the proposed reforms to the NHS and the 38 Degrees campaign.

I
am deeply committed to the NHS which is why I am pleased that Prime
Minister has said that it is a major priority of this Government.

The
reform plans were examined in detail by the independent NHS Future
Forum, which comprised the country’s leading doctors, nurses and NHS
experts. They concluded that the twin demands on the NHS – of an ageing
population and of rising costs of new treatments and technologies –
meant that reform of the NHS was needed. They also recommended
significant changes to the Government’s original plans, which we have
accepted. These significant changes have addressed many of the concerns
originally raised by 38 Degrees and others.

I am unsure as to the
basis of the latest concerns expressed by 38 Degrees. First, 38 Degrees
suggests that the Health and Social Care Bill, “removes the Secretary
of State’s duty to provide”. However, 38 Degrees’s own legal advice
states that the Secretary of State has never had such a duty to provide.
Therefore, the Health and Social Care Bill makes no changes to the
Secretary of State’s duty to provide, because it never existed in the
first place.

Second, 38 Degrees suggests that the Health and
Social Care Bill opens up the NHS to competition law. However, once
again, 38 Degrees’s own legal advice states that competition law already
applies to the NHS.

I hope you agree with me that 38 Degrees’s
concerns are without foundation, as their own legal advice has
confirmed. Thank you again for taking the time to contact me.

Yours sincerely

Caroline Nokes

Caroline Nokes MP

My MP Mark Reckless (Rochester Kent) has not replied to my email.  This is despite my addition of a personal note informing him that my husband, under the care of a leading brain cancer/tumour professor, was told at a recent consultation that this professor has been made redundant, after 25 years of service to the hospital. Not only that, his replacement is a) only temporary and b) one of his old students!  My husband’s MRI scan has been postponed for a further 2 months, despite the gravity of his diagnosis. THERE ARE TOO MANY BRAIN CANCER SPECIALISTS IN THE NHS? 

I’m renaming Mark Reckless to ‘Mark Couldntcareless’. 

The problem is that the majority of the public do not know that this is happening next week. The only thing getting coverage is the abortion amendment. Is there any of the money left for a national ad campaign again?

My MP Paul Uppal in wolves SW has not responded. According to the Labour party group collecting signatures to present to Mr Uppal today, this is what many concerned wolves residents have told them as they signed this morning. I hope his silence is a sign of him being conflicted between the party line he is told to take and the concerns and objections of his constituents who wish him to vote against the bill. This may however be hopeful in the extreme.
Many thanks 38degrees for taking on this cause and giving it everything you could.
I wait in hope
Sarah, NHS Physiotherapist

This is what my MP said:

Thank you for contacting me about the Health and Social Care Bill.

The significant amendments the Government is making to the Health and Social Care Bill have been welcomed by many organisations, including the NHS Confederation, patient groups, and think tanks.

You asked about three specific points. First, you wanted reassurance that the Secretary of State’s duty to secure provision of NHS services will not be abolished or passed to another body. I can confirm that the Bill, as amended, will not abolish this duty or pass it to another body.

Second, you wanted reassurance that private companies will not end up in charge of determining what services are provided on the NHS. I can confirm that the Bill will not allow this to happen.

Third, you asked for assurance that the NHS Commissioning Board will not put more emphasis on competition and choice at the expense of encouraging different bits of the NHS to work together for patients. I can confirm that this is the case.

Best wishes

Chris Grayling

This is the reply I got back from my MP….

I will of course be voting against the Bill – the American model is far too
expensive and exploitative to emulate…
Very best,
Tristram Hunt MP

This was my MP, Lee Scott’s less than satisfying reply:

Dear John thank you for your email ,and I believe your fears will not come to fruition ,we all value the NHS and its staff who do a great job but I will be supporting the Government Regards Lee
—–Original Message—–
From: john bradley [mailto:bopsterbp@btinternet.com]Sent: 06 September 2011 18:34To: SCOTT, LeeSubject: NHS plans: How are you going to vote?Dear Lee Scott MP,As a member of NHS frontline staff for 10 years I am extremely concerned about your government’s plans to increase the involvement of private healthcare companies in the NHS. I do not believe this is in any of our patient’s interest, although it is clearly to the advantage of shareholders. I believe your government is compounding the policies of the last two governments and these plans will serve to further destroy this amazing organisation on the basis of misguided ideology and greed. I’m extremely concerned that the health minister could end up with no “duty to provide” a health service, and also that there could be many more court cases involving the NHS because competition law from Europe and the UK could start to be more widely applied. Please tell me how you plan to vote this week and whether or not you support the government’s current plans?Yours sincerely,john bradleymailto:bopsterbp@btinternet.com]Sent: 06 September 2011 18:34To: SCOTT, LeeSubject: NHS plans: How are you going to vote?Dear Lee Scott MP,As a member of NHS frontline staff for 10 years I am extremely concerned about your government’s plans to increase the involvement of private healthcare companies in the NHS. I do not believe this is in any of our patient’s interest, although it is clearly to the advantage of shareholders. I believe your government is compounding the policies of the last two governments and these plans will serve to further destroy this amazing organisation on the basis of misguided ideology and greed. I’m extremely concerned that the health minister could end up with no “duty to provide” a health service, and also that there could be many more court cases involving the NHS because competition law from Europe and the UK could start to be more widely applied. Please tell me how you plan to vote this week and whether or not you support the government’s current plans?Yours sincerely,john bradley

I recieved a similar reply – practically word for word – from Stephen Mosely (Con MP for Chester) It annoys and disappoints me that the people who were fortunate enough to be elected to represent us, once in office become subservient clones in whatever party they are affiliated to. They don’t represent our views, just those of a misguided Party leader. ’All in it together’, you bet they are.

My MP, Guy Opperman (Hexham) decided to respond to my written concerns AFTER the vote last Wednesday. (So much much for listening to consistuents). He sent an 8 page attack on 38 degrees (which may be a standard response from the Tory party). If you (38 degrees) would like a copy of the response please email me at vkillen@hotmail.com
Plenty of work to do still with the Lords. you are doing a great job!