Patient and Public Involvement in Health Sources

Home ] Up ] The Campaign ] Petitions ] Events index ] Health Policy ] Democracy ] The NHS ] Talks Letters & Articles ] Contacts and Further Reading ]
 

  • Muzzling the Watchdog. The self-congratulatory fanfare announcing the launch of the national plan for the NHS has overshadowed real concerns about accountability, raised by the plan's proposed abolition of community health councils (CHCs). Established in 1974, CHCs have provided a national network of independent health watchdogs. The plan fragments part of their work across a number of new bodies and gives no indication as to who will perform which of their functions. There are also significant worries about how effective and independent the proposed replacement structures will be. Guardian 13 September 2000
  • Getting rid of community health councils (CHCs) as outlined in the NHS plan has proved tougher than ministers might have thought. Guardian Society Wednesday March 21, 2001
  • Health and Social Care Act 2001
  • National Health Service Reform and Health Care Professions Bill and explanatory notes
  • A fresh attempt to strengthen patient power in the NHS in England got a frosty reception yesterday from consumer groups and the Labour chairman of the Commons health select committee.  John Carvel, social affairs editor Guardian Unlimited  Tuesday September 4, 2001
  • Involving Patients and the Public in Healthcare.  Department of Health link to several documents at stages in consultation up to November 2001 and our response December 2001.
  • A Healthy Outlook - Local Authority Overview and Scrutiny of Health: Audit Commission Management Paper
  • The first signs of rebellion over the government's NHS reform bill emerged today after a senior Labour backbencher called for new community councils to be created to safeguard NHS patients' rights.  Guardian Society Friday January 11, 2002
  • Rebels urge rethink on patients' watchdog.  Guardian Society Wednesday January 16, 2002
  • Patient power deal for NHS.  Low-key arrival for 'watershed' reorganisation.  James Meikle, health correspondent Guardian Monday April 1, 2002
  • "Defeat this change to the health bill." Guardian letter supporting Government proposals Thursday April 11, 2002
  • Peers rebel and back patients' councils.  Patrick Wintour Guardian Wednesday May 1, 2002
  • The job of ensuring that health care delivery in England is up to scratch is to be transferred to local authorities. Are they ready for it?  Margaret Kubicek Wednesday September 4, 2002 The Guardian
  • The government today appointed former health and social work manager Laura McMurtrie as its new "patients' champion" for the NHS.  Simon Parker Friday November 15, 2002
  • The government wants people to shape their own local health services, but getting the public interested is proving difficult.  Margaret Kubicek Wednesday January 15, 2003 The Guardian
  • Q&A: patient and public involvement in the NHS.  Patrick Butler explains what the government's new system of patient representation will mean for service users. Wednesday January 15, 2003
  • Harry Cayton carries his onerous responsibilities with admirable cheerfulness. How would you like to be the key spokesman for the millions of NHS patients? He must also endure the absurd title that Whitehall imposed: director of patient experience and public involvement at the Department of Health. Patients' tsar would have been preferable. Malcolm Dean Wednesday January 22, 2003 The Guardian
  • Ministers have been accused of bungling the introduction of a new patients' rights system for the NHS after they announced that community health councils would be abolished six months before the new arrangements become operational.  Patrick Butler Friday January 31, 2003
  • Q&A: patient and public involvement in the NHS.  Patrick Butler explains what the government's new system of patient representation will mean for service users.  Friday January 31, 2003
  • Community health councils (CHCs) in England appear to be heading for gradual disintegration, despite a government decision last week to postpone their abolition by three months until December 1. John Carvel Wednesday June 11, 2003 The Guardian
  • Preparation for patients' forums in crisis. Critics claim abolition of Community Health Councils in favour of new system will lead to chaos. Hugh Muir Monday October 27, 2003 The Guardian
  • Forums are in good health. Letters Wednesday October 29, 2003 The Guardian
  • Health minister Rosie Winterton today announced £2.25m to help improve council scrutiny of local health services. Helene Mulholland Thursday October 30, 2003
  • A new era of patient involvement in the NHS is heralded by the launch of patient and public involvement forums (PPIFs) today, amid claims that the new scheme is a pale imitation of its predecessor. Monday December 1, 2003
  • Changes to the NHS complaints system mean Iain is out of a job. No need to panic - Debbie Andalo has some tips for his next step in patient advocacy. Wednesday December 17, 2003 The Guardian
  • Corrections and clarifications. Friday December 19, 2003 The Guardian . We said that the National Association of Citizens Advice Bureaux manages "the new NHS independent complaints advocacy services (Icas)" in a feature headed What else can I do? (Society, page 40, December 17). This body is neither managed by CAB nor is it part of the National Health Service but comes under the remit of the Commission for Patient and Public Involvement in Health.
  • It has been heralded a "quiet revolution". But the volume will be notched up a little today with the formal launch of a network of more than 570 patient and public forums across England. David Brindle Wednesday February 11, 2004
  • Patient forums were created so that communities could scrutinise local health services. But Mark Gould finds a lack of resources, accessibility and awareness . Wednesday April 21, 2004 The Guardian
  • Seeking medical advice will soon be easy for patients in Southampton thanks to a new online service. Michael Cross reports. Wednesday June 30, 2004 The Guardian
  • The health secretary, John Reid, today named the health service quangos which will be scrapped in a government drive to cut bureaucracy that will mean the loss of more than 6,000 jobs. Ben Willis Thursday July 22, 2004
  • About 6,000 jobs will be axed in a cull of NHS quangos in the next four years, releasing an extra £500m for frontline patient care, the health secretary promised yesterday. John Reid said a reorganisation of NHS agencies operating at arm's length from the Department of Health would include the abolition of the Mental Health Act Commission , the Health Development Agency and the NHS Modernisation Agency. A government report said 38 "arm's-length bodies" spent £4.8bn a year, including operating costs of £1.8bn. Half were created since Labour came to power in 1997. By 2007/8 they will be reduced to 20 organisations. Many will be merged or subsumed into other agencies and there were doubts in the service last night that the savings would be as large as ministers claimed. John Carvel, social affairs editor Friday July 23, 2004 The Guardian .  Includes Commission for Patient and Public Involvement in Health.
  • Patients and consumer groups today condemned plans to abolish the national body responsible for involving the public in the health service. Scrapping the Commission for Patient and Public Involvement in Health (CPPIH) will leave the NHS unaccountable to the people it serves, according to campaign groups. David Batty Friday July 23, 2004
  • Labour wants to give people more control over services. But what, asks David Walker, will this enthusiasm for public participation mean for local councils? Wednesday January 12, 2005 The Guardian
  • Ministers' apparent U-turn over public involvement in health policy has left one key player, Sharon Grant, baffled and bruised. She talks to David Brindle. Wednesday March 23, 2005 The Guardian
  • Why the NHS is a bad listener. The NHS has still not got the hang of listening to patients, says Anna Coote. Wednesday April 20, 2005 The Guardian
  • Calderdale primary care trust's patient and public involvement forum should have held its annual general meeting this week. One of the topics for discussion was hygiene levels and infection rates at the local hospital. Forum members – volunteers in West Yorkshire who act as an independent patient watchdog – had inspected the wards there, and their report was to be presented to the meeting. Whatever its conclusions, the public will have to wait until after the election to find out. The meeting has been postponed. Pre-election purdah mania is spreading - and stifling public debate, says Alison Benjamin Wednesday April 27, 2005 The Guardian
  • Patients' forums are failing to achieve their aim of scrutinising health services and influencing policy and practice at a local level because they are being hamstrung by weak structures and are mired in bureaucracy and administration, say critics. The forums, composed of volunteers, were designed to transform public involvement in the NHS in England. But from August, nearly a quarter (126) of the 572 forums will lose back office support, leading to fears that they will become even more ineffective. Mark Gould Wednesday May 11, 2005 The Guardian
  • The organisation responsible for involving patients in NHS care has been given a 12-month stay of execution, it emerged today. The Commission for Patient and Public Involvement in Health (CPPIH) was due to be abolished next August as part of a Department of Health (DoH) cull of arms-length bodies announced last year by the previous health secretary, John Reid. Hélène Mulholland Tuesday August 23, 2005
  • A welcome stay of execution. The government's latest rethink on patient involvement in the NHS is good news for health trusts, says John Carvel. Tuesday August 23, 2005
  • Patricia Hewitt As the health secretary prepares to address the party faithful on the government's stategy for the NHS, she tells John Carvel how she is tapping into public perspectives of the service to help make it more efficient. Wednesday September 28, 2005 The Guardian
  • A key plank of the government's policy is putting the public and patients at the centre of health and welfare. All the talk is of partnership and user involvement; the "expert patient" and the "active citizen". Yet evidence shows that the government's own benefits policy is pushing people in the opposite direction, discouraging them from making a contribution and perpetuating their social exclusion. Wednesday October 19, 2005 The Guardian
  • Patients' forum excluded from the board of a foundation hospital. Members of the patient and public involvement forum (PPI) for the University Hospitals of Leicester NHS Trust said they were assured of a place on a council of governors running a proposed foundation trust, but the hospitals trust has now decided to exclude them. The trust, which runs Leicester Royal Infirmary and Glenfield and General hospitals and has applied for foundation status, said having the forum on the council would compromise the forum's independent role.  Leicester Mercury 21 December 2005
  • What's driving the health reforms. Thursday February 2, 2006 The Guardian
  • Patient power enlisted to help hold GPs to account. The health white paper says that PCTs will be forced to bring in new providers where patients want them. National primary care director Dr David Colin-Thom said 'local triggers' could be activated through patient surveys and petitions or local authority health overview and scrutiny committees. First, six areas will have primary care services procured by the DoH via a competitive tendering process. West Yorkshire SHA chief executive Mike Farrar is heading work on contestability in primary care. Summary by Keep our NHS Public of Health Service Journal 2 February 2006
  • Patient forums could be on way out. Dr David Colin-Thom, the national primary care director, has hinted that patient forums could be jettisoned in favour of a more 'organic' approach to local involvement in health. Asked whether patient forums had had their day, Dr Colin-Thom said: "That seems to be the view". Instead PCTs will be held to account through a series of 'triggers' activated through mechanisms such as patient surveys, local authority overview and scrutiny committees and petitions via councillors. Patient forums were conspicuous by their absence from the recent white paper. The chair of the Commission for Patient and Public Involvement in Health, Sharon Grant, said it is "inconceivable" that the government should press ahead with some of the biggest changes in NHS history without an effective system for patients to be heard. Summary by Keep our NHS Public of Health Service Journal 9 February 2006
  • Fears over changes to local health voice. The government is setting up a panel of experts to assess how a strong local voice in health and social care arrangements can be ensured. The move follows reports that patient forums could soon be abolished and RCN concern about the government's intention to review the process of statutory consultation on service consultation. The recent primary care White Paper said that the review would ensure processes were "swift and effective".  Summary by Keep our NHS Public of Independent Nurse 21 February 2006
  • Patients: "Give us a voice". The Patients and Public Involvement Forum for University Hospitals of Leicester NHS Trust is calling for a reversal of the decision not to allow it a place on the council to run the General and Glenfield hospitals and Leicester Royal Infirmary, in the event of the trust winning foundation status. The trust had said there would be no place for the forum, despite earlier suggesting that there would be. The trusts foundation status has been put on hold while the government scrutinises details of the £761 million Pathway hospitals improvement project. The forum says that this gives the trust the opportunity to reverse their decision. The forum was supported by two Leicestershire MPs who said that the organisation needed a voice. The forum has written to the Secretary of State, MPs and the joint overview and scrutiny committee, urging them to put pressure on the trust to change its mind. The trust remains unmoved. Summary by Keep our NHS Public of Leicester Mercury 24 February 2006
  • Nine out of ten want more say in running health services. Nearly nine out of 10 people in the South West think they should be given more say in how their local health services are run, according to a survey. Summary by Keep our NHS Public of Bristol Evening Post 3 April 2006
  • Death of the forums. A Times leader says: "If ministers go ahead and end the experiment of patients' forums in the coming months, as seems likely, mourning will be misplaced… There is little to celebrate, though, in their demise. Their problems were largely of design rather than performance, and ministers bear responsibility for wasting time and effort given by well-meaning citizens and money belonging to the wider taxpayer. Unlike their Community Health Council predecessors, which were based on health regions, the forums covered individual trusts and were too close to the bodies that they were supposed to monitor… They were further hampered by bizarre arrangements whereby their administration was outsourced to third parties, including charities, some of which have increasingly decided such work to be unsuitable for them."  Summary by Keep our NHS Public of  Times 15 April 2006
  • NHS patient groups axed two years after creation. The country's network of patient forums, introduced a little over two years ago to give patients a say in the running of the NHS, is to be abolished in the latest reorganisation of the service. It comes after the Commission for Patient and Public Involvement in Health (CPPIH), a central body designed to promote patient views, was abolished within two years of being created. Patient forums replaced community health councils. Critics say the constant change is costly and wasteful.  Summary by Keep our NHS Public of  Times 18 April 2006
  • Health forums must stay open. In a letter to the Times, Joyce Robins, co-director of Patient Concern, writes: "When [patient forums] were launched, Patient Concern voiced its suspicions that the aim was to fragment and disempower the patient voice. Community health councils, which had often exposed the defects of the NHS, were abolished and patient forums became the new initiative. These initiatives are fast becoming a scandal, launching one after another without proper planning. When they don't work, we are thrust into another reorganisation at a cost of millions. Unless the Government is willing to set up a system that can hold local NHS services genuinely accountable to patients, even if they do not always like its findings, those millions will simply be thrown away."  Summary by Keep our NHS Public of  Times 18 April 2006
  • NHS 'fails to involve patients'. Patients in the UK play less of a role in decisions about their own healthcare than those in other developed nations, according to a report by the Picker Institute. Summary by Keep our NHS Public of  BBC Online 24 April 2006
  • Contract choice 'a travesty'. A patient involved in the decision to award contracts to run two practices in south London to Concordia Health has labelled the process a "travesty". Martin Saunders, a member of Southwark patient and public involvement forum and a patient at one of the practices, said his views were ignored and his involvement had been "tokenism". He said: "It was a travesty. It was so scary the way it was done. They were very nice people but you could tell there was a hidden agenda." Southwark PCT chose Concordia Health, whose directors include former GPC negotiators Dr John Chisholm and Dr Simon Fradd, to run the Melbourne Grove and Parkside practices. The decision not to award the contracts to salaried GPs already running the practices has caused controversy. Summary by Keep our NHS Public of  Pulse 12 May 2006
  • An ambulance in Tyneside was misdirected twice by a satellite navigation system when on an emergency call.  The chair of the patient and public involvement forum said, "... Satellite navigation can be very effective when it is used correctly and with local knowledge.  It should not be relied on by itself though." Summary of Daily Mail 16 May 2006  [There is a danger of ambulance drivers' local knowledge becoming less complete as a result of the Government's decision to merge ambulance trusts.]
  • Local involvement networks set to replace PPI forums. The Department of Health is to push ahead with a shake-up of public involvement in health and social care despite delays to a local government white paper that could seek to bolster the role of councils in voicing community concerns. A review recommends that public and patient involvement forums be replaced by 'local involvement networks' covering a geographic primary care trust area instead of being linked to a particular organisation. The new networks would be voluntary organisations with individual and organisational members, with directly provided budgets of around £150,000 per annum to maintain an office and staff. Regulators, including the merged Healthcare Commission and Commission for Social Care Inspection, will be given explicit requirements to involve the public fully in their work. However, ideas floated in the white paper Our Health, Our Care, Our Say for more public involvement in health overview and scrutiny committees, and for councillors to be given new powers to put forward community petitions and force PCTs to tender-out poorly performing services, are unlikely to feature. Guidance will be published next month setting out how the duty to consult on reconfiguration, outlined in section 11 of the Health and Social Care Act 2001, will be extended to cover social care and new providers. A new obligation to make a public response to consultation is also expected. Summary by Keep our NHS Public of  Health Service Journal 18 May 2006
  • Can general practitioners compete with big business? Dr Elizabeth Barrett writes: "The Langwith case reached the High Court over whether there was an obligation to activate section 11 of the 2001 Health and Social Care Act, in this particular case.1 The act states, among other things, that patients should be involved in the development and consideration of proposals for changes in the "way" in which their services are provided. The national debate on privatisation is a separate issue, but the publicity given to this case has been an important part of informing people how the culture and the drivers are changing in the NHS." Summary by Keep our NHS Public of  British Medical Journal 2 June 2006
  • Government reforms will 'destroy the NHS'. Speaking to the annual BMA consultants' conference, Paul Miller, chairman of the consultants' committee, said: "This has been the NHS's best year ever ... for management consultants ... for losing staff ... for wasting money." He estimated that private management consultants were costing around £3bn a year and used the work of private managers in Department of Health-appointed "turnaround teams" sent into 18 trusts with financial difficulties as examples of wasted money. This included £700,000 paid to management consultants for three months' work at Surrey and Sussex trust, despite the fact it still finished the last financial year with "an operating deficit of £28m and an accumulated deficit of over £57m".The multi-billion pound contracts awarded to independent sector treatment centres were also a waste of money, Dr Miller said. Calling for a moratorium on any other private treatment contracts, he said Oxfordshire primary care trust had been made to pay £500,000 a year for the next four years to a private eye clinic despite there being no shortage of NHS capacity to do the work. He said only 160 of the 400 operations planned in the contract annually were carried out last year. This was unnecessarily inflating local NHS debt, which stands at around £82m. Dr Miller also criticised the PFI, highlighting £130m wasted on three deals: the abandoned Paddington PFI scheme, which cost £14.9m; the delayed Barts PFI scheme, which cost an extra £35m; and the Norfolk and Norwich PFI, under which the NHS missed out on £82m when the private contractors refinanced the deal. "If you had made this up, you would be laughed at," Dr Miller said. "If you were the one who did make this up, you should be ashamed. If you continue to make it happen, you will destroy the NHS. This is not the way to run our NHS… It is hard to avoid the conclusion that we are working in a service which is being broken by policies which do not work; devised by officials who have resigned; implemented by managers who don't believe [in the NHS]; and patients without a say." His speech, which got a standing ovation, was echoed by criticism of the government made by delegates. A member of the BMA's consultants committee, Dr Anna Athow, said the government had allowed the NHS to get into the current financial crisis in order to ration services and push more resources and patients into the private sector. Summary by Keep our NHS Public of  Guardian 7 June 2006
  • Politicians in line for a drubbing. Patient and public involvement is a 'sham' and politicians are 'pretty useless' at explaining NHS reform, key NHS figures have warned. Picker Institute chief executive Professor Angela Coulter described patient and public involvement as a 'sham'. But Monitor chair Bill Moyes questioned how much the public should be able to influence the configuration of services given that they are not healthcare provision experts. Summary by Keep our NHS Public of  Health Service Journal 9 June 2006
  • Village fails to block US GPs plan. NHS patients and villagers in Langwith on the Derbyshire-Nottinghamshire border have failed in their challenge to private US company United Health's contract to run their local GP surgery. The villagers claimed that the consultation process preceding the awarding of the contract was flawed. However, in a ruling that has widespread implications for the NHS, the judge Mr Justice Collins stated that while the consultation was indeed flawed it "would not have been likely to have made any difference." He went on to suggest that the patients should have sought an "alternative remedy" to court action though his ruling includes guidelines on the duty to consult which may have a widespread effect upon NHS institutions. Anger at the proposals was previously aggravated by North Eastern Derbyshire PCT's exclusion from its shortlist of a local, council backed proposal from Dr Elizabeth Barrett. Summary by Keep our NHS Public of  Liverpool Daily Post 15 June 2006
  • Herts consultation labelled a 'sham'. A Hertfordshire trust has announced plans to withdraw services from one of its sites to help tackle a £28m deficit - just 12 days after a public board meeting at which the issue was not discussed. Under the new proposals, acute services would be centralised at Watford from next year using 'modular buildings' to increase capacity: either St Albans or Hemel Hempstead Hospital would lose all trust-run services, with the other keeping elective surgery going until a new independent treatment centre is due to open in Hemel Hempstead in 2008. Local councillors and MPs were incredulous at the way the trust announced the proposals. Previously the trust proposed consulting on three options, including one which would move acute services away from Watford: this was dropped within days when it was met by scepticism from the council's health scrutiny committee. Committee chair Michael Downing said: "The build-up of services in the community that should have happened in advance of the reconfiguration has not happened. People won't get services or will have to travel further." Summary by Keep our NHS Public of  Health Service Journal 15 June 2006
  • Village to fight on over US firm's surgery deal. Villagers have promised to fight on after a judge refused them a judicial review over plans for an American company to take over the running of their GP surgery. Although Mr Justice Collins, in the High Court, agreed with the residents of Langwith, Derbyshire, that they were not properly consulted, he did not quash the decision as he found the residents had not sought an alternative remedy before going to court. The judge said the North Eastern Derbyshire Primary Care Trust had not consulted the residents before they named UnitedHealth Europe as the "preferred provider" for the contract to provide a GP service. He laid down guidelines on the duty to consult which will affect NHS authorities around the country. But he said the objectors should have gone first to the local Patients' Forum. It was "unfortunate" that Pam Smith, the resident who led the challenge, had apparently not known of its existence. Mrs Smith said she believed that her community had been let down by the court's decision. "But we can always appeal and if that fails, we'll be watching the company and how that surgery is run and I'll be on to them as soon as it goes wrong." A Health Department spokesman said: "We will shortly announce steps to give people a stronger voice at all levels in the health service." Summary by Keep our NHS Public of  Telegraph 16 June 2006
  • Courts back private takeover of practice. Health campaigners in Derbyshire have lost their fight to block a contract awarded to private company United Healthcare Europe to run a practice in the area. High Court judge Mr Justice Collins ruled against Pam Smith because he said she should have taken the case to the Patients Forum before bringing judicial review. However, in his judgment, he also said the consultation process had been flawed and that PCTs should consult the public in future, if there was any doubt. He awarded 75% of the costs against the PCT. Lobby group Keep Our NHS Public, which backed the case, welcomed the judgment as "a crushing defeat" for the Department of Health as it had established the need for PCTs to consult the public, even though the case had failed. Derbyshire LMC secretary Dr John Grenville said he still wanted to know how UHE had been awarded top scores, having no track record of providing primary medical services and knowledge of the locality: "It seems perverse that they should have top-scored." The LMC will lodge a formal complaint with the Information Commissioner under the Freedom of Information Act to access the scores if necessary, which were denied to it for the duration of the court case. Dr Grenville said: "The question remains how the PCT came to its judgement that UHE was the best of a very large bunch of applicants. Until we know how they arrived at their decision it is going to be difficult for future applicants, be they multinational companies or single-handed GPs, to know what the rules are." Summary by Keep our NHS Public of Doctor Update 21 June 2006
  • NHS must consult over service changes, judge rules. The Department of Health cannot legally change the way NHS services are provided without first consulting the affected local population, a high court judge has ruled. The judgment reinforces the statutory duty of NHS organisations to consult patients and the public - outlined in Section 11 of the 2001 Health and Social Care Act - at a time when the future of the existing Patient and Public Involvement forums are in doubt. The case was brought to court by Pam Smith - a North East Derbyshire resident - to overturn her local primary care trust's decision to outsource local GP provision to the US-based United Health Group without public consultation. Although the judge dismissed the case on the basis that Smith should have taken her complaint to her local PPI forum first, he rejected the PCT and DoH's defence that consultation in such cases was not necessary. In his judgment, Justice Collins said: "Where there is doubt whether [section 11] can apply, the PCT would be sensible to assume that it does, since it can in most cases easily be met through the Patients' Forum." A spokeswoman for the Department of Health said: "Although the court decided that the duty to consult did apply, it also stressed that there is no evidence that the tender process… was other than fair. We will shortly announce steps to give people a stronger voice at all levels in the health service." Summary by Keep our NHS Public of  Public Finance 23 June 2006
  • All work and no say. My role as a non-executive in the NHS seemed to be to toe the line, maintain a happy consensus and 'supervise deterioration' of trust services. Peter Barker Wednesday July 5, 2006 The Guardian [Non-executive directors seem to be no more influential than PPI forum members.  Contrast elected councillors, who collectively are in control of their local authorities]
  • NHS set to boldly go where patients lead. Health minister Rosie Winterton is due to announce plans to set up Local Involvement Networks (LINks) in every part of England. They will replace the patient forums that were created in 2005 to watch over the conduct of individual NHS trusts. But, unlike the forums, they will look after all the concerns of patients and social service users throughout each geographical area. The aim is to have joined-up complaining for supposedly joined-up services. There will be a LINk in every local authority area that has social services responsibilities. Winterton wants them to dovetail with the councils' overview and scrutiny committees (OSCs). The OSCs will be encouraged to focus on how health and social services are commissioned, allowing councillors to exert an influence on priorities determined by unelected primary care trusts and their private sector partners. Winterton will promise legislation to place a duty on commissioners to respond to what patients and the public have said. She will confirm the abolition of the Commission for Patient and Public Involvement in Health - set up less than three years ago after the government abolished community health councils. There is no detail on what will replace it. Summary by Keep our NHS Public of Guardian 12 July 2006
  • Patient voice 'to be beefed up'. Firms are being invited to run PCT services in an extension of private involvement in the NHS. An advert was pulled from the Official Journal of the European Union two weeks ago after it implied private firms could take control of PCTs, which control 80% of the NHS budget to buy in services from hospitals, GPs and community services. The government said the plan was to allow PCTs to "pick and mix" the services they want to outsource to allow them to take advantage of "specialist skills" of the private sector. It means private firms are being given an opportunity to get their hands on local NHS budgets, which much of the medical profession remains against because it means firms will be involved in commissioning services and providing care, creating a potential conflict of interest. Alex Nunns, of anti-private campaign group Keep Our NHS Public, said the plans amounted to the same as what was proposed in the pulled advert, but just added a "veneer of public accountability". Ministers also announced that patients are to be given the power to petition local health bosses to force changes in services. A petition would need to be signed by 1% of the population to trigger a formal response from PCTs which commission local services. If it was a specialist service, a response would be triggered if a tenth of users signing up. However, while the PCT would be duty bound to respond and put in place an improvement plan, it would not have to do exactly as the public wished. Ministers said patient power will be further boosted by the setting up of patient bodies called Local Involvement Networks (LINKs) to take on the responsibilities of patient forums. LINKs will be based on wider geographical areas than those covered by individual trusts. Summary by Keep our NHS Public of BBC Online 13 July 2006
  • NHS may be challenged by users. PCTs are to be required to respond to public petitions that can garner significant support, Patricia Hewitt has announced. A signup of 1% of the population, or 10% of the users of specialised service, will be enough to force PCTs to consider a petition. While the PCT may disagree with any suggestions, it must provide justification for its decision. The Times says the first test of the scheme is likely to come from challenges to the involvement of the private sector in the management of PCTs. Summary by Keep our NHS Public of Times 14 July 2006
  • Petitioners could get right to a response. Primary care trusts will be forced to react to petitions from service users and the public if controversial proposals from the Department of Health get the go ahead. The commissioning framework released last week says such petitions could include demand for new services or dissatisfaction with providers and provision. They could not be used to prolong debate on a proposed service reconfiguration after the end of a formal consultation exercise. The proposals have raised fears that well-resourced and organised pressure groups could sway a primary care trust in their favour. Summary by Keep our NHS Public of Health Service Journal 20 July 2006
  • Public asked about health service. Liverpool's health professionals are asking the public how best to spend an extra £70m earmarked to improve the city's local services. The government money is to be spent on services for people not receiving hospital-based care. Members of the public are asked to join the Big Health Debate by commenting on a specially set up website. The primary care trust has posed a series of questions to test what people think about current services. This includes such questions as how easily they can get appointments, how far they travel and the journey they go through in the treatment process if they are referred for tests. Other questions designed to explore ideas for future improvements, include GP opening hours. Summary by Keep our NHS Public of BBC Online 26 July 2006
  • Public get say on health plans. The people of Abingdon and Wantage will get their say on the future of healthcare in the district following fears they could be left out of talks. Despite proposals to possibly close Wantage Hospital and reduce services at Abingdon, the Oxford Radcliffe NHS Trust did not originally include the two towns on a list of places where residents would be consulted. Current thinking among the health authorities is that Wantage and Henley hospitals should close, Abingdon may be downgraded to a day care centre, Didcot would become a maternity unit and that Wallingford should be expanded to a 60-bed unit. A jointly-organised petition has already attracted 30,000 signatures, with residents wanting all hospitals to remain open. Summary by Keep our NHS Public of Abingdon Herald 27 July 2006
  • Signs of the times: will people power deliver accountability? In an appendix to the annex of the Commissioning Framework for the English NHS is a proposal that could become either a thorn in your primary care trust's side or a thoroughly modern boost to local democracy and empowerment. 'Triggering community action' envisages mechanisms that would make PCTs respond to petitions from the public and/ or service users. This policy seems to be attributable to Paul Corrigan, visiting professor of public policy at London Metropolitan University and special adviser to Number 10. People might, he has suggested, demand alternative services from independent providers. Institute for Public Policy Research research fellow Joe Farrington-Douglas said: "The health reform agenda is more driven by marketisation than by strengthening civil society. There are elements of devolving power [from the centre] to PCTs, but we have seen very little being devolved to the public from PCTs." PCTs and national organisations contacted by HSJ were by and large unwilling to comment but none saw the idea in positive terms; a couple of PCTs felt that petitions would be a line of last resort - an admission of failure to engage by other means. Summary by Keep our NHS Public of Health Service Journal 27 July 2006
  • NHS watchdog 'has no bite'. A leading health campaigner says the Government wants an NHS watchdog with no teeth. Geoff Ryall-Harvey, who runs the administration of Patient and Public Involvement (PPI) Forums in this area, says a decision to abolish PPIs represents a further erosion of public engagement in decision-making. The plan is to replace PPIs with Local Involvement Networks from next summer. He said: 'Whatever they say about wanting to involve the public, they don't want to involve the public who know something about the health service. Under the new regime rights to access information and make unannounced visits to inspect NHS premises would go. Summary by Keep our NHS Public of Ellesmere Port Pioneer 4 August 2006
  • Dismay as one patient forum is cancelled to launch another. The chairman of a Croydon patient forum, ensuring local people have their say in decisions about borough health services, says he is angry at Government plans to abolish the group. The Department of Health has announced that Patient and Public Involvement (PPI) forums were to be replaced with Local Involvement Networks (LINks), billed as a much wider patient and public involvement system. However Peter Howard from Shirley is campaigning against the plans and is encouraging the community to write to their local MPs in protest. Mr Howard argues that LINKs will not be truly independent. Summary by Keep our NHS Public of Croydon Guardian 10 August 2006
  • Health plans put debts above patients. A health watchdog has described a consultation over local NHS cuts as "'unsatisfactory". Members of Cheshire County Council's Overview and Scrutiny Committee (OSC) said there were concerns that proposals to redesign the local health service were not based on the health needs and risks within the population. There was an emphasis on "cuts in service" compared with essential reinvestment in certain areas. OSC chairman Cllr Brendan Doyle said it was ironic the turnaround team imposed by the Government to sort out the funding problems costs £10,000 a day from a hard-pressed budget. In his conclusions, he said: "There is little evidence the proposals are based on need and risk or that they offer a vision for the area." Summary by Keep our NHS Public of Chester Chronicle 18 August 2006
  • A pensioner has scuppered plans by America's biggest healthcare company to run a GP surgery in Derbyshire by winning a case against them in the court of appeal. Yesterday Pam Smith succeeded in forcing United Health Europe (UHE), the British arm of the US firm, to reapply for the tender to provide family doctors for the people of Langwith, on the Derbyshire-Nottinghamshire border. The judges, Lord Justices Keene and May, ordered North Eastern Derbyshire primary care trust to start the tendering process from scratch after ruling NHS patients had not been properly consulted.  Sarah Hall, health correspondent Thursday August 24, 2006 The Guardian
  • Patient power scuppers health plans. The Government's plans to encourage private companies to run GPs' surgeries received a huge blow yesterday when the Appeal Court ruled that a primary care trust [North Eastern Derbyshire] which awarded a contract to a multinational health care corporation had failed to consider the wishes of local residents. Pam Smith, 67, a resident who led the legal challenge against the PCT's decision, said: "This is a victory for the common people. This has set a precedent and we now know that if local people object to a huge corporation coming in they will have to be listened to. At the beginning of all this Patricia Hewitt stood up and said we would have choice but we were given none. Everyone voted against UHE yet the PCT awarded them the contract. We felt railroaded. Now the PCT will have to consult us and will be left in no doubt our feelings on the matter." The Court of Appeal decision has wide implications for Labour's health agenda which has opened the door to private companies providing NHS services as well as implications for the companies themselves. Summary by Keep our NHS Public of Telegraph 24 August 2006
  • Pensioner strikes blow against reforms of family doctor services. A pensioner has struck a blow against government health reforms after she won a legal battle to stop a US-owned company from taking over family doctor services in part of Derbyshire. The Court of Appeal yesterday ruled that the North Eastern Derbyshire Primary Care Trust had failed properly to consult the residents of two former mining villages before provisionally awarding UnitedHealth Europe a contract to run GP surgeries in the area. The judgment could slow the government's drive to increase the involvement of the private sector in the NHS. PCTs now face having to consult widely with the public before tendering, providing a focal point for campaigners who say the government is bent on privatising the NHS. The ruling is doubly embarrassing for the government as the chairman of the European arm of UnitedHealth is Simon Stevens, Tony Blair's former health adviser and a strong advocate of a bigger role for the private sector in healthcare. The government is looking to bring in private providers to deliver services of 800 GPs in 30 areas with a shortage of doctors, mostly in northern England. Pam Smith, the pensioner who brought the legal challenge, said it was "a real case of David and Goliath". "I would love to be a fly on Patricia Hewitt's wall now. She keeps saying patients have a choice; well we've made our choice. UnitedHealth would only have taken profits. We will keep our NHS public, not private - that's what makes Britain unique." Summary by Keep our NHS Public of Financial Times 24 August 2006
  • Health watchdog attacks trust over £8m cuts. A patient watchdog has attacked plans by health chiefs to ration treatment in the struggle to save £8m. Craven, Harrogate and Rural District PCT is examining cuts that could see patients referred to hospital only for urgent treatment with more care being provided in the community. Angry family doctors have already branded the proposals unsafe, claiming the cuts will "undermine the principles of the NHS". The plans would mean that for the first time in the history of the NHS, doctors would not be able to refer people who in their opinion needed expert help to hospital. The opposition from GPs has forced managers to think again and now the area's patient and public involvement forum has expressed its fears that plans to refer people to expert GPs rather than to hospital specialists could put patients at risk. The forum has also criticised proposals not to fill vacancies, leading to a reduction in nurses dealing with young people with mental health problems and staff trained to assist people with learning disabilities. Summary by Keep our NHS Public of Yorkshire Post 25 August 2006
  • Budget cut to fund other hospitals. Cash-strapped Royal Free Hospital is having more than £2 million cut from its budget to fund the building of six new PFI hospitals across London. In what the Government is claiming to be the largest hospital building programme in the history of the NHS, six new Private Finance Initiative hospitals are set to be built using NHS money previously set aside for education and training. Under the plans, the Royal Free will lose £2.1m from its £33m training budget, which is used to teach nurses, midwives, doctors, undergraduate medical students and other staff. Arthur Brill, chairman of the Royal Free's Patient and Public Involvement Forum said: "I think it's an absolute and utter disgrace that they are taking away money from hospital training programmes to build unnecessary hospitals. They never even consulted us. The Government needs to cater for the needs of the local community which it's certainly not doing at the moment." The trust's current deficit for 2006-07, which it aims to pay back this year, is £16.2m. Summary by Keep our NHS Public of Edgware & Mill Hill Times 25 August 2006
  • Your opinion matters, as long as you agree. In an opinion piece, Alasdair Palmer writes: "Consultation is supposed to be one of the hallmarks of modern government. Decisions taken by public bodies are now meant to be open, transparent, and accountable: they should respond to public opinion, not ignore it. That, at any rate, is the theory behind "consulting with the public", and who can oppose it ? Well, probably everyone who has some experience of how "consultation" works in practice. Last week, judges told the North Eastern Derbyshire Primary Care Trust to re-tender the contract for providing GP services in the village of Langwith on the grounds that it did not consult sufficiently widely. The decision was hailed as a victory for a local campaign against United Health Europe, an American company that the trust had chosen to run the GP services. Pam Smith, the Langwith resident who organised the campaign, said that the judges' decision showed they agreed with her that the US company "would only have taken profits. We will keep our NHS public, not private." She is going to be disappointed… The primary care trust now merely has to "consult" the local community, but it is not bound by the results of that consultation, whatever they are, and they will probably turn out to be whatever the Derbyshire trust wants them to be… Is it any wonder that "consultation" now generates cynicism and disappointment with government ? It promises "people power" but it delivers the usual autocracy, with additional layers of bureaucracy and mountains of paper. No wonder managers love it." Summary by Keep our NHS Public of Telegraph 27 August 2006
  • NHS cancels 2,000 ops. Bristol's major hospitals cancelled nearly 2,000 operations at the last minute over the last year, a figure that nonetheless improves on the year before. Department of Health figures show that North Bristol NHS Trust, which runs Southmead and Frenchay Hospitals, cancelled 1,406 operations in the year up to March, 372 less than previously. United Bristol Health Care Trust which runs the Bristol Royal Infirmary, among others, cancelled 535, down from 657 the year before. A spokesperson for North Bristol NHS Trust said: "A vast majority of operations are cancelled because of a shortage of beds. The problem is much worse in the autumn and winter months when our emergency admissions are at their highest." Summary by Keep our NHS Public of Bristol Evening Post 28 August 2006
  • Learn from S11 ruling, advises PCT. The chief executive of the primary care trust which had its contract with UnitedHealth Europe quashed by the Court of Appeal has urged the rest of the NHS to learn from the case. North Eastern Derbyshire PCT chief executive Martin McShane said last week's ruling - that the PCT breached its duty to consult when it awarded a primary care contract to UHE - provided the service with clarification of how consultation should work. He said the message from the judge was that under the Health and Social Care Act, organisations needed to be able to formally demonstrate that they had taken the views of stakeholders into account, which meant seeking input before setting the criteria for a tender. Mr McShane said: 'If we had checked our criteria with the patient and public involvement forum, that would have made the difference.' He pointed out that the 'genuine belief' of the PCT - that section 11 of the act did not apply in this case - had been backed by the strategic health authority and health secretary. The process will now start again and be taken over by the new Derbyshire County PCT in October. Pam Smith told HSJ that she was 'over the moon' with the verdict - and would now urge the PCT to give residents a vote to decide who provides medical services in the villages of Creswell and Langwith. She said: 'UnitedHealth have never even run a surgery before and they won the contract. I don't want our village to become a social experiment. Patricia Hewitt says we have choice and now we intend to use the right of choice.' While the verdict is seen as a blow to UHE, the company last week won contracts to provide primary care services with neighbouring Central and Greater Derby PCTs. In a statement, UHE chief executive Dr Richard Smith said: 'We support public consultation and are pleased that we will be providing primary care services elsewhere for people in Derbyshire. We believe that we can make a significant contribution in the region to reducing health inequalities.' Alex Nunns of pressure group Keep Our NHS Public said Mr Smith's statement was equivocal. 'It might be that UnitedHealth won't go for the tender [for North Eastern Derbyshire] again, given the level of opposition.' UHE said it would 'wait and see' details of the new tender before making a decision. Dr Elizabeth Barrett, a GP in Creswell and one of the unsuccessful bidders, said: 'The DoH rhetoric is that the alternative provider medical services contract means we are all the same - how can a small village GP and a massive multi-national company be the same ?' Summary by Keep our NHS Public of Health Service Journal 31 August 2006
  • Derbyshire village wins court battle. Residents of a former mining village in Derbyshire have won their battle for a greater say in whether a private company should be allowed to take over their local general practice. Summary by Keep our NHS Public of British Medical Journal 1 September 2006
  • You'll get no say on hospital staffing cuts. There will be no public consultation over plans to close 30 beds and cut 27 jobs at Kingston Hospital, health chiefs have said. The cuts are designed to help clear the £9million deficit in Kingston Primary Care Trust's finances and include the loss of 21 orthopaedic beds and five female health beds. Hospital staff are being consulted about the changes, but no wider consultation would take place because a modelling exercise has shown there would be no adverse affect on patient care, a hospital spokesman said. Geoff Martin from pressure group London Health Emergency said the situation was a "shambles" and that cuts were bound to hit patients. The hospital's Unison representative Nora Pearce said the cuts were coming in because a new referral centre system introduced two months ago meant less referrals were reaching hospital. The Kingston Clinical Assessment Service (KCAS) looks at all patient referrals with a view to treating them in GPs' surgeries rather than wards. Mrs Pearce said: "As a Kingston resident and potential patient, if I go to my GP and my GP believes I should go to hospital and I was in pain, that is what I would want." Other savings, including the Royal Eye Unit at the Galsworthy Road hospital, are being put to the public. Summary by Keep our NHS Public of Kingston Guardian 1 September 2006
  • Oxford man to fight closure of pain unit. An Oxford man has received the backing of a High Court judge for a review of the future of the Chronic Pain Relief Unit at the city's Churchill Hospital. Kevin Comley and Vera Marriott are challenging the way the Oxford Radcliffe Hospitals NHS Trust carried out consultation over the clinic which treats more than 3,000 patients a year. The trust is proposing closure of part of the in-patient part of the unit as part of cutbacks because of an annual overspend of more than £30m. High Court judge Mr Justice Collins has granted permission for a judicial review of the claim against the trust. But the case is effectively adjourned for several months for the trust to negotiate a settlement on the issue to avert a further hearing. Mr Comley said: "The pain unit is vital to me. The PCT have not thought about patients, not fully consulted them about what is going to happen. Even now most people don't understand how it's going to affect them… I feel they are trying to shove everything under the rug, ride roughshod over everyone without them being given enough information about what is going on." Summary by Keep our NHS Public of Oxford Times 1 September 2006
  • Public will get a say on future of inpatient care. Campaign leaders will meet hospital chiefs for the first in a series of meetings aimed at securing hundreds of thousands of pounds to save infirmary services. Action group Save Our Northwich Inpatients Campaign (SONIC) has been fighting the closure of the inpatients ward at Northwich's Victoria Infirmary (VIN) since health chiefs announced plans to shut it down earlier this year. After amassing nearly 14,000 signatures, the Central Cheshire PCT bowed to public pressure and is now working with SONIC to negotiate extra funding for VIN following the Government's promised £750m cash injection for community hospitals. SONIC leader June Chapman said residents already had cause for celebration following the PCT's turnaround. She said: 'The result is a real tribute to people power.' Summary by Keep our NHS Public of Northwich Chronicle 7 September 2006
  • Victory for patient power. Patients now have the power to put the brakes on primary care privatisation, claim campaigners after winning an appeal court ruling. The Appeal Court said last month that North Eastern Derbyshire PCT would have to retender its alternative provider medical services contract for the Creswell and Langwith practice. The PCT previously awarded the contract to United- Health Europe, but a local patient group argued it was inadequately consulted. GP Dr Elizabeth Barrett, who unsuccessfully bid for the contract, said the ruling meant PCTs would now have to canvass patient opinion before drawing up the selection criteria for a tender. She said: 'This is a significant valve in what seems to be an uncontrolled process. Patients being involved will act as a stopper valve. I think it will change things - how much I don't know.' Dr Barrett added that she would resubmit a bid for the practice. Summary by Keep our NHS Public of Doctor Update 7 September 2006
  • Hospital crusader faces £80,000 bill. A pensioner is risking financial ruin to save wards at her local hospital. Former nurse Pat Morris has been warned she could have to pay up to £80,000 if a judge rules against her on Monday. She hoped to get Legal Aid in her battle to challenge the closure of two rehabilitation wards at Altrincham General Hospital, but now she has been told her application has been turned down. The Legal Services Commission, which administers Legal Aid, rejected the request by Health in Trafford (HIT) - a protest group headed by Morris. If she loses her case she will be handed a bill estimated between £70,000 and £80,000 for the legal costs of the health trust and the court for staging the judicial review. Morris's six-month battle is expected to end in the Royal Court of Justice in London when her barrister, acting for free, will argue Trafford Healthcare Trust (THT) "unlawfully" closed the last in-patient wards at Altrincham because they failed to carry out public consultation. Trafford hospital bosses closed the two wards in March, claiming they had no choice because patient safety was at risk - but admitted it would also save cash. At the last hearing, Mr Justice Collins ordered THT bosses to consider re-opening the wards, but they decided not to. Mrs Morris has so far funded the legal bid and a series of protest meetings herself, collecting only a few hundred pounds in donations. The HIT protest group is furious at the way the Legal Aid application was handled. HIT member Judie Collins has written to Vera Baird MP, who oversees Legal Aid, to investigate. She claims the aid was refused because of a mix-up over a phone interview and because Legal Aid officials over-estimated the amount of funds the protest group had. Ms Collins said: "This claim has been entirely mismanaged. It was rejected on the most surprising of grounds of inability to make contact at a pre-arranged conference call. Whatever the reason, I was surprised that a single bungled call could dismiss a case of such importance to an individual without a second opportunity. A second confusion is an assertion that HIT is a fully constituted organisation with substantial resources and membership. There has never been a formal group organisation, canvassing for membership or mechanism for collecting or soliciting funds." Summary by Keep our NHS Public of Manchester Evening News 8 September 2006
  • Patient power sees off US giant. Pulse writes: "It is a story worthy of being the next Billy Elliot-style blockbuster. Set against the backdrop of a deprived former mining community, a retired hosiery machinist thwarts the efforts of a multibillion-dollar US company to muscle in on two small local healthcare providers. The feisty pensioner is adamant that the public body that chose to bring in the company ignored the wishes of a local community who were set against its plans. Using state-funded legal aid, she instructs a renowned human rights lawyer to fight her case. But the first legal challenge at the High Court in June ends in ignominious failure. The judge rules that North Eastern Derbyshire PCT had not needed to consult local people because it was re-providing an existing service, not tendering for a new one. Even if there had been consultation, the judge adds, the PCT would still have probably picked the same US-based firm, UnitedHealth Europe. However, the woman, a patient at one of the small GP surgeries to be taken over, is not to be deterred. She contests the decision at the Court of Appeal. And, after a nine-month fight that at times looked hopeless, she prevails. The court rules that the PCT should start the tender process for the practices from scratch - and this time let the public help set the criteria against which bids will be judged. In stopping UnitedHealth Europe taking over the Creswell and Langwith practices, Pam Smith has had a huge impact on the development of the NHS." Richard Stein, Pam Smith's lawyer, said: The Court of Appeal sends out an important message to all NHS bodies. It's not just a theoretical duty to consult patients but one that if they don't comply, courts will force them to." This duty should also increase the possibility that GPs will win such contracts in future ahead of the larger private companies with no local ties. If patients are more involved in setting criteria for selecting bids, they will likely place more onus on local knowledge and community investment. At the very least, selection processes should become more transparent. Dr Elizabeth Barrett, local GP and a leading member of campaign group Keep our NHS Public, said: "When we first bid we didn't know we would be up against multinationals. Now the whole climate has changed dramatically. We've changed the law and held the PCT and the Government to account. But ordinary, mainstream NHS doctors find it difficult to succeed against the private sector." Dr Chaand Nagpaul, chair of the GPC's commissioning and service development subcommittee, is in no doubt that the verdict should help safeguard traditional general practice: "We know the public values traditional general practice much more than the Government seems to. Now the Government cannot continue promoting ideological policies without the public behind it." North Eastern Derbyshire PCT has already scheduled a meeting with the chairman of the local Patient and Public Involvement Forum to work out how the group can contribute to a new tendering process. As with the first process, a panel made up of a representative of local clinicians, a PCT non-executive director, a member of a practice patient participation group, the trust's chief executive and its director of commissioning will interview shortlisted bids. A restructured primary care trust - Derbyshire County PCT - will take over on 21 October and will be handling the final decision. Summary by Keep our NHS Public of Pulse 8 September 2006
  • Consult patients on change. A Court of Appeal ruling that North Derbyshire PCT failed to properly consult patients over a tender to run two practices will have a major impact on GPs, the chief executive of the trust has warned. Dr Martin McShane said GPs who sought to merge practices or substantially change the way their business worked would in future have to show they had taken patients' views into account. Dr McShane, a former GP, said the requirement could affect singlehanders wanting to retire and would also extend to practice-based commissioning consortiums. Summary by Keep our NHS Public of Pulse 8 September 2006
  • £1m consultation had no impact on policy. GP complaints that the Government's high-profile public consultation on the future of primary care was a sham have been supported by an official evaluation of the project. Most people involved in the Your Health Your Care Your Say consultation felt they had little or no impact on the final policies, the evaluation commissioned by the Department of Health found. Only one in seven people who attended the £1 million series of 'town hall'-style meetings felt they had had an influence on the eventual White Paper. Almost half felt that issues raised in discussion at the events were not considered in the questions they were asked as part of the consultation. The evaluation highlighted a 'lack of transparency in the iterative policy development and analysis process, during and after the deliberative events'. Some participants felt that certain discussion topics and polling questions were 'leading'. Summary by Keep our NHS Public of Pulse 8 September 2006
  • MPs could probe ward closure. The closure of a Holderness cottage hospital ward may be scrutinised by the House of Commons health select committee if it is found that services are being cut as a result of overspending. Committee chairman and Rother Valley MP Kevin Barron said: "We are continuing to look into the NHS deficits issue and what's happening where there has been overspend and it might be that this is one of those cases. If it came to our attention we would look at it. We need to know whether this has come about as a result of deficits." Yorkshire Wolds and Coast PCT announced last week it was shutting the 12-bed ward because it could not afford to recruit agency staff to cover at the hospital. The trust said current staffing levels were putting patients and staff at risk. It described the closure as temporary and said it would review the situation in March. But a national lobby group, which includes senior doctors and trades union leaders among its ranks, has accused the trust's managers of using stealth tactics to bring about the permanent closure of the ward. The group, Keep Our NHS Public, fears the ward will close for good when it stops admitting patients on October 1. Spokesman Alex Nunns said: "We've seen this in other parts of the country where trusts close a ward and say it's only for a limited period of time, and when that time is up, surprise, surprise, it doesn't open again. It's a method managers use to close things down." The axeing of the ward infuriated many in the area, including those who successfully blocked plans to shut the hospital's minor injury unit last year. Campaigners are considering a legal challenge and Mr Nunns said he believed that was worth pursuing. He said: "Closing a ward is a major service change and patients have legal rights to be consulted. They need to use those rights to keep this ward open. There was a case in Oxford where they planned to close a pain relief unit, and just the threat of legal action from patients forced a U-turn. Legal action is available to patients and we would encourage them to use it." Staff from the ward, who are being transferred to other services in the area, are also said to be unhappy at the decision. Polly Worsdale, East Riding councillor for North Holderness, and a member of Holderness Hospitals Action Group, said: "Just after it was announced I saw one of the nurses and she was in tears. All they want to do is look after people." Summary by Keep our NHS Public of Yorkshire Post 10 September 2006
  • Have a say on health, ministers urged. Then they turned a deaf ear. A £1 million public consultation into the future of NHS services has been exposed as a "sham" by an official Government evaluation into the landmark project. A large proportion of the people who took part in Your Health, Your Care, Your Say, the consultation vaunted by ministers for allowing people to influence a White Paper on health published this year, felt they had little or no impact on the final policies. Only 14 per cent of those who took part felt that their views had been taken into account in the White Paper. Ministers faced criticism that the whole event was geared towards getting the answers they wanted to questions that did not reflect the issues people had raised. Health campaigners point out that the pledges to bring care closer to home are now being shattered by a wave of NHS "reconfigurations". The evaluation report, commissioned by the Department of Health, said there were concerns about "restricted polling questions" that were "slightly leading and framed to get specific answers". Concerns about making sure money was ploughed into hospitals and GP surgeries instead of walk-in centres at supermarkets were lost. Summary by Keep our NHS Public of Telegraph 18 September 2006
  • Children's hospital proposals for closing kids psychiatric ward slammed by leading Birmingham patients watchdog. Proposals by the Birmingham Children's Hospital to pursue the closure of a key ward treating children with serious psychiatric conditions have been slammed by the Eastern Birmingham Patient and Public Forum. The forum, which was instrumental in stopping the closure of the ward earlier in the year, following the revelation that the hospital had not consulted parents and children and was therefore in technical breach of the statutory duty to consult, believes that the lessons of the previous exercise have not been learned. Summary by Keep our NHS Public of Eastern Birmingham Patient and Public Involvement Forum 11 October 2006
  • Welcome for report by maternity group. Mums fighting to save a North-east maternity unit have welcomed a new report. And they claim the findings by the Scottish Health Council are "open to interpretation". The council conducted an independent inquiry into NHS Grampian's consultation process. They found the trust had consulted adequately with the local population over its proposed changes to rural health services, including the closure of four maternity units. But members of the Save Aboyne Maternity group said that the review also highlights many weaknesses in the consultation process. And they are confident that these will be taken into account by Health Minister Andy Kerr who will make a final decision on the proposals. In the report NHS Grampian was accused of conducting an "arrogant" and "cloak and dagger style" consultation. Under its plans, which were unanimously backed by the health board in August, maternity units at Aboyne, Fraserburgh, Huntly and Banff would close.  Summary by Keep our NHS Public of Aberdeen Press & Journal 24 November 2006
  • Health merger consultation starts. A merger between a hospital trust facing an expected £15m deficit by the end of the financial year and a foundation trust has moved closer. Health Secretary Patricia Hewitt has approved a consultation on plans to merge Good Hope Hospital NHS Trust and Heart of England NHS Foundation Trust. Heart of England said it expects the merger to take place on 1 April 2007. NHS West Midlands Strategic Health Authority is now consulting whether Good Hope should be dissolved and become part of the nearby foundation trust. If the foundation trusts' regulator supports the plan, the Health Secretary will make the final decision. Heart of England currently runs Birmingham Heartlands, Solihull and Birmingham Chest Clinic. The new organisation would serve about a million people, from Solihull through Birmingham and into south Staffordshire. Ms Hewitt said: "The proposal to merge an NHS Trust with an NHS Foundation Trust indicates our seriousness about NHS reform and our confidence in the rigours of the financial regime of Foundation Trusts to take on this challenge." Summary by Keep our NHS Public of BBC Online 13 December 2006
  • Hewitt challenged over lack of ISTC consultation. A patient is challenging Health Secretary Patricia Hewitt's decision to set up an independent sector treatment centre (ISTC) in north Bristol without consultation. Rebecca Fudge, who is supported by the Save Frenchay Hospital Group, is seeking a judicial review of the DoH's plans for an ISTC to be run by UK Specialist Hospitals. According to documents filed by Leigh Day & Co, solicitors for Ms Fudge, the DoH is due to sign a contract with the company in March 2007. Ms Fudge claims Mrs Hewitt wrongly advised NHS South West and South Gloucestershire Primary Care Trust that they did not need to consult the public, because the DoH was leading on the scheme. She will argue that as both bodies provided information to potential bidders and evaluated bids they did have a duty to consult. The DoH has also said consultation should occur only once the contract is signed. But in their outline challenge Leigh Day said: '[The consultation] will be taking place long after the decisions about the planning and development of services have taken place.' The lawyers also said it was 'immaterial' that patients would have a choice about whether to use the ISTC, as it would still form part of the local health economy and commissioners would be buying services from it. In her witness statement, Ms Fudge said: 'I am shocked that such a large-scale development would be proposed without any consultation with the public.' A judge will decide next year whether Ms Fudge's case should be allowed to proceed. If successful, the case will have significant implications for other schemes under the DoH's 'wave two' ISTC programme, such as the private Cumbria ICATS (integrated clinical assessment and treatment service). NHS North West argued in response to a challenge from Unison that consultation was only necessary once the DoH had signed contracts with Netcare, the preferred bidder on the scheme. The proposed contracts in both Bristol and Cumbria guarantee minimum levels of income for the private providers if their services are not used. Summary by Keep our NHS Public of Hospital Doctor 14 December 2006
  • Failure to talk to public delays private GP plan. Sefton Primary Care Trust has admitted that plans to commission a new privately run clinic in Maghull would be delayed because it needs to consult the public more. At the same time it was admitted that the PCT is in negotiations with one company for the contract, though strict Department of Health rules mean the name of the preferred provider cannot be revealed. Merseyside campaigners claimed that, after another private surgery plan in Derbyshire was ruled by the High Court to have been inadequately consulted on, they had a similar case after the PCT refused to release the names of ten short listed companies. Julie Goulding, the PCT's acting director of Corporate Services, insisted that the PCT would closely regulate the centre's standards. The clinic is one of six pilots under the government's new Alternative Provider Medical Services (APMS) contracts. Proponents of the contracts say it will increase efficiency but members of Keep Our NHS Public say it will divert NHS resources towards profit driven private companies. Peter Crowder, spokesman for the newly formed Maghull KONP, formed to fight the GP surgery plan, accused the PCT of "back-pedalling". "They have not fulfilled their legal obligation to consult the public, and now they are trying to back-pedal and make it look as though they have consulted us. It's a foregone conclusion now because they've chosen a provider. But for the public it's a choice between this, or this. There isn't any choice for the public, they've already decided - so what's the point of consulting us now ?" He added: "The only consultation they did was about where the clinic should be, not who should operate it." Ms Goulding denied that there would be any damage to quality and pointed out that the move was needed to attract GPs to an area that had difficulty recruiting surgery staff. She added that GPs in the area had now allowed the PCT to see if any extra patients could be taken on by existing surgeries and that, while there was little chance the plan would be dropped, if an existing surgery could take on an extra 200 patients, it "would have to be looked into." Summary by Keep our NHS Public of Liverpool Daily Post 19 December 2006
  • Watchdog refuses to back inquiry into future of wards. A patient's watchdog has refused to back a consultation because they say that health bosses have ignored a solution that received popular support in initial meetings. Trafford Healthcare Trust was forced to carry out consultation on the future of two inpatient wards at Altringham General Hospital in March after initially closing them because they were unsafe. Legal action by a former nurse at the hospital, Pat Morris, forced the trust to perform public consultation. Now local patients' groups say that the options being presented to the public exclude the suggestion of turning the wards into a rehabilitation and respite unit, an idea that had won support at two pre-consultation "listening" events. However the only two options the trust is offering the public are to close the wards and provide a centralised service, or re-open and re-establish a consultant-led inpatient rehabilitation service. Judie Collins, from Trafford Patient and Public Involvement Forum said: "We feel the consultation document has been rushed - and we want to make sure the public understand what they are being asked. Members of the public said they wanted the beds back, to be used for rehabilitation and respite, and they will be confused that this option is not included in the consultation." A hospital spokesperson said the third option was not included because they wouldn't receive any extra funding from Trafford Healthcare Trust to provide it. Summary by Keep our NHS Public of Manchester Evening News 19 December 2006
  • Patient forum changes "will fail". The British Medical Association has warned that the establishment of Local Involvement Networks (Links) to replace existing forums will fail because they lack funding and their structure is flawed and open to unacceptable variations. The groups will differ from their predecessors in covering a geographical area instead of being linked to specific NHS bodies, as well as covering both health and social care. The BMA, in response to a Health Select Committee inquiry on public involvement in the NHS, said the proposals would mean fewer groups to represent patients and that the suggested £100,000 and £150,000 funding would be insufficient. Juliet Dunmur, deputy chairwoman of the BMA Patient Liaison Group, said: "Many people would like a say in how their health services are run, but have never been given the opportunity. If Links are to have any real influence they will need much more support than their predecessors ever received." But a Department of Health spokeswoman said: "The current arrangements to support a stronger patient voice were designed to fit the health service five years ago. Since then, the NHS and social care system has changed and it is now time to strengthen peoples' voices further." Summary by Keep our NHS Public of BBC Online 25 January 2007
  • Confed criticises public consultation bill. The NHS Confederation has criticised the government's new bill on public involvement in health services for placing a duty of consultation on providers, as well as commissioners. The confederation says only primary care trusts and strategic health authorities should have to consult on the planning and provision of services and on 'significant proposals' to change the way services are provided and operated. Foundation and other provider trusts should instead have a duty to involve users, deputy director of policy Jo Webber said. The bill's proposals are being interpreted as a response to the legal row over North Eastern Derbyshire PCT's decision to commission GP services from independent provider UnitedHealth Europe. The PCT was censured by the High Court for failing to consult adequately on its proposals. Under the new bill, the health secretary may also demand a PCT report on its consultation and the influence of results on its commissioning decisions. Ms Webber said: 'Certainly, after Derbyshire, clarification was needed about what was meant by consultation. I think [the bill] will clarify this but we will need to look at the guidance associated with it.' The proposal in the bill for LINKs hit controversy in the Commons. Shadow health minister John Baron said they would lack the independence and ringfenced funding of predecessor organisations. Where patients' forums had the power to inspect services, LINks will have a right to enter and view. Summary by Keep our NHS Public of Health Service Journal 25 January 2007
  • Bill to abolish patients' forums criticised as "disgraceful". A UK government bill to reform the way patients and the public participate in decisions about local health services had its second reading this week in parliament, where it faces opposition from the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats. The Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Bill will abolish patients' forums and replace them with local involvement networks (LINks). It will also modify the duty to consult the public about changes in health service provision. In the place of patients' forums, local authorities will be put under a duty to make contractual arrangements for the involvement of people in the commissioning, provision, and scrutiny of health services and social services. LINks will cover social care services as well as health, will be established for a geographical area, and will decide locally how members will be appointed and how others will contribute. Summary by Keep our NHS Public of British Medical Journal 26 January 2007
  • NHS drive to involve patients "is failing". A survey for the Department of Health has revealed that patients are less involved in healthcare than they were three years ago, signalling a blow to the Government's championing of choice based on increased patient involvement. In the survey of 10,000 patients conducted for the Department of Health, only 45 per cent said they were given as much information as they wanted about their medicines and many were unhappy with access to GPs with seven out of ten wanting surgeries open out-of-hours. The report also showed that the government's target of 48 hours to see a GP was being approached with nine out of ten being able to be seen within the targeted time. Summary by Keep our NHS Public of Independent 30 January 2007
  • New patient forums 'will not have enough money'. The organisations that will replace patient forums will not have enough money to operate efficiently, doctors and patients are claiming. The BMA's patient liaison group is warning that the annual subsidy of up to £150,000 planned for each Local Involvement Network (Link) branch may not cover staff wages, buildings expenses and other costs. Summary by Keep our NHS Public of Pulse 2 February 2007
  • LINks will fail public, warns CPPIH chair. Government proposals to make the NHS more accountable to patients will actually exclude the public from long-term decisions worth billions, MPs have heard. Giving evidence to the Commons health select committee, Sharon Grant, chair of the Commission for Patient and Public Involvement in Health, said that by the time new organisations were set up to replace patient forums, primary care trusts would already have made crucial long-term decisions on commissioning. She said Department of Health proposals to scrap her organisation and the 570-plus patient and public involvement forums in England would result in less accountability. Ms Grant said PCTs would take spending decisions before LINks had had time to mature into effective scrutiny and involvement organisations. 'Commissioning contracts would have been made lasting for five years or more from which the public would have been largely excluded. I have serious concerns about what these proposals will actually do for the public involvement agenda.' And she added: '[Ministers] really need to think about the message all this chopping and changing means for genuine local involvement.' Ms Grant and fellow witnesses Elizabeth Manero, the chief executive of patient involvement charity Health Link, and Barrie Taylor, the chair of Westminster Council's health oversight and scrutiny committee, said that rather than starting afresh, patients forums should be allowed to evolve and involve many other interest groups. They pointed out that many were already doing this. Dr Richard Taylor MP summed up the view of the committee: 'We all feel that the existing system could be refined and built up and needs a further two years gestation to help it grow its capacity'. Summary by Keep our NHS Public of Health Service Journal 15 February 2007
  • 'Raise bar' on consulting. Trusts and strategic health authorities must 'raise the bar' on the quality of local service consultations, says Sir Ian Carruthers in his national review of current reconfiguration proposals. Although the review does not name individual consultations or say how many succeeded or failed, Sir Ian said the poorest performers were below the standard he would expect. The draft letter presented to the DoH management board says that it has 'set out the standards all SHAs and trusts should aspire to'. An appendix sets out a framework which the letter says should be used by SHAs and trusts preparing for service consultations. The letter also says primary care trusts should take a central role in leading reconfiguration. 'PCTs should normally lead the preparation and consultation on service improvement proposals,' it says. The review found high variation in the manner and success of reconfiguration consultations, even within the same area. Sir Ian said: 'The detail, style, format [and] language of consultation documents varies too much. When you read a lot of them, it is not clear what is being discussed.' Summary by Keep our NHS Public of Health Service Journal 1 March 2007
  • CATS consultation "illegal". The Patient and Public Involvement (PPI) forum for Central Lancashire Primary Care Trust (PCT) has claimed that the trust's consultation over CATS health centres is illegal. The forum's chairman, Professor Peter McEwan, told a meeting in Preston that the consultation was "inadequate" and being used as a "promotional vehicle" for Netcare, the private company that is to run the centres. "This consultation process is flawed. The time to carry it out has been far too short for such a complex issue. It is a recipe for disaster to continue as we are. We are asking that the matter is referred back to the Secretary of State for a proper consultation," said Professor McEwan. The PPI's initial report on the consultation says that its eight week length "flouts the minimum 12-week consultation period" advised and that the consultation lacked clarity and key information. Professor McEwan said in the report: "As a consequence, we believe the consultation actually constitutes a breach of the requirements of Section 242 of the NHS Act 200 and thus we formally request a formal referral concerning the content and outcome of the consultation process to the Secretary of State for Health." The primary care trust insisted that people would be given a choice between Netcare and the NHS. Councillor Michael Lavalette, who organised last night's meeting through the Preston branch of the Keep Our NHS Public campaign group, warned that this was the start of "the private sector taking more and more of our services". The meeting resulted in a 150-strong unanimous vote to let the NHS run the centres instead of Netcare. Summary by Keep our NHS Public of Lancashire Evening Post 1 March 2007
  • Power to the patients. The days of "Trust me, I'm a doctor" are over, says Sophie Petit-Zeman. Patients got impatient last week. Or rather, at one remove, 223 medical charities and related groups did, writing to the government urging it to rethink a proposed ban on the creation of hybrid animal-human embryos as sources of stem cells for research. That number, 223, belies a far larger one: the people these groups help, and who support them, in turn. The letter to the government represented patient power writ large; it follows a growing trend for patients saying what they want, both from care and research. Tuesday April 10, 2007 EducationGuardian.co.uk
  • MPs say public role in NHS being undermined. Proper public consultation on the National Health Service will be undermined by "vague and woolly" legislation passing through parliament, a committee of MPs has said. The Commons Health Committee criticised government proposals to limit public consultation on healthcare changes to "significant" proposals and decisions. The proposed changes are contained in the Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Bill, which is nearing the end of its passage through parliament. Consultation on NHS changes, such as the closure of maternity wards, was already a sham in some cases, the committee said. "The Department of Health needs to take a lead and make it clear that such behaviour will not be condoned." MPs said the planned replacement of England's 400 Patient Forums by 150 "Local Involvement Networks" (LINks) only four years after the volunteer-run health watchdogs were created was unnecessarily disruptive, and might push volunteers to leave. "Once again the Department of Health has embarked on structural reform with inadequate consideration of the disruption it causes," the committee said. The MPs said the health secretary - currently Patricia Hewitt - intervened too often in decisions after extensive local consultation, leading to illogical conclusions and undermining public confidence in the consultation process. The opposition Conservatives said the Labour government was wrong to abolish the patient forums. "With Labour now seeking to close maternity and accident and emergency units, it is the wrong time for the government to be weakening the duty on NHS bodies to consult," said Conservative health spokesman John Baron. Summary by Keep our NHS Public of Mirror 20 April 2007
  • S11 changes weaken consultation, says Commons health select committee. The commons health select committee has warned that plans in the Local Government and Health Involvement Bill to change section 11 consultation rules would further weaken public and patient involvement which is already a "sham" in places. The change would mean consultation would only have to take place on "significant" decisions, not all, with significant being defined as having substantial impact on the manner in which services are delivered to a wide range of users, or the range of services available. The report states that at present the theoretically excellent system suffers because "people feel they are consulted after decisions have been made". "There has also been criticism of NHS organisations' refusal to consult about major changes and of the Department of Health's vigorous support of these decisions," the report says. "We fear the bill will weaken section 11. The change of definition it proposes may lead to confusion and could lead to more court cases when the act is tested." NHS Confederation policy manager Maria Nyberg said the committee's conclusions on the bill were worrying. "We do not believe that the legislation will weaken consultation. Rather, we need to be clear about the difference between ongoing patient and public involvement in decision-making, and formal consultations on significant service redesign. Ongoing involvement and engagement with patients and the public about health is of course essential if healthcare is truly going to be patient focused. Engaging with the local population must be properly embedded within NHS organisations. However, involvement is very different from formal public consultation, which is not required unless significant changes are being made to service quality, quantity or access." She added: "Healthcare providers and commissioners need to be able to make clinical and managerial decisions quickly and remain agile in a competitive market." Summary by Keep our NHS Public of Health Service Journal 26 April 2007
  • MPs fear abolition of PPI forums will lead to lose of volunteers. Government plans to scrap patient and public involvement forums and set up local involvement networks (LINks) instead has come under fire from the Commons select committee. The committee's findings state: "We do not see why PPIFs could not have been allowed to ev