SIGNS of NHS PRIVATISATION are HERE

I started this blog because I think that the general public in UK is being deceived. The changes that the government is introducing to the NHS have as a final outcome the privatisation of the NHS.

Here what is snippet on what is already in the public domain showing the steps taken towards the privatisation of NHS.

2010

Recently, Michael Payne, general secretary for the Association of Medical Insurance Intermediaries, predicted that more people will be looking for private healthcare in the near future. He stated that talks with members of the government left him with the impression that the increased uptake will be driven by the NHS having to limit the number of services and treatments it provides to patients for free.

2007

Public Private Realities in Healthcare: An Analysis of European Hospitals

By Dr Tim Evans Director of Development for the Stockholm Network

“In 2000, the then Secretary of State for Health, Alan Milburn, signed a Concordat with the representative body of Britain’s now resurgent independent health and social care sector – the Independent Healthcare Association (IHA). Under this agreement, the NHS could send its patients to independent hospitals and clinics for treatment and care. Between 2000 and 2003 more than 250,000 NHS funded patients annually received treatment and care in the independent sector and others were sent to private hospitals abroad. “

Overall, the direction of travel in the NHS is clear. Selling off NHS land, the private finance initiative, acceptance of public private partnerships, the Concordat with the independent sector, independent sector treatment centres and foundation hospitals all point to an increasingly privatised future on the provision side.

Today, the NHS has effectively been redefined as a regulator and a key funder of healthcare but it is no longer deemed to be a necessary provider – or owner - of the facilities in which health services are delivered. Secretary of State for Health, Alan Milburn, commented: “Changing it from a monolithic, centrally-run, monopoly provider of services to a

values-based system where different health care providers – in the public, private and voluntary sectors provide comprehensive services to NHS patients”

(The NHS sell-off started years ago)

NHS privatisation by the coalition goverment

The coalition government will not abolish the NHS in name. It will keep it the name. Under the umbrella of NHS there will be a series of private providers running the show and profiteering The only analogy I can think off is like been sold a BMW in which the only true BMW component is the badge.

This government will keep the badge and sell the parts

This has been decided well ahead of time and it is quite interesting that the mandarins of Whitehall had the plans in place even before the election outcome was knwon. It would be interesting to see who form Whitehall had a few drinks with private healthcare providing lobbyists before the elections.

More concrete evidence that the future of NHS has been predetermined even before the election?

December 2009

David Cameron had one hour of talks with the leader of the group Nurses For Reform (NFR) (see private agency nurses that cost the NHS double the cost of an NHS nurse) in his private office in the Commons. Talks concluded with an agreement that included "the view that the state should not own or have any of its agents manage hospitals.".

August 2010

The government accused of 'promoting privatisation' of NHS after sell-off plans announced for agency providing thousands of health workers

The department of health said it would explore options for private sector investment in the state-owned NHS Professionals, which has 50,000 workers on its books and places staff for two million shifts a year at 77 health trusts.

The department said the plan "is in line with the government's policy to maximize the value of assets and commercial opportunities," and it will hold meetings with the private sector on "options and opportunities,".

Obvious connection? STARTLING. Indicative of privatisation YES

August 2010

The latest consultation paper from the DOH entitled “Regulating healthcare. Liberating the NHS: providers”

There are numerous of references in this paper clearly showing the privatisation of services through fundamental changes in the foundation trusts and the fact that hospitals can be taken over if they deem not to performs as expected (as judged by government that would like to privatise them).

Here is one piece of evidence from this consultation:

Monitor (the body for monitoring NHS trusts) has powers to regulate prices and license providers only for NHS services. Providers of other care services, including adult social care, would still be required to register with the CQC but would not be required to hold Monitor’s licence. The rationale for this is that there is limited choice of alternative providers for many NHS services and some communities are highly dependent on one, or very few, providers. In adult social care and private healthcare, there are already mature markets with a range of choice between alternative providers.

In other words, hospitals and local NHS providers will have their prices set by the government but private providers will be free to cost their services as they like.

The likely OUTCOME?

It is like a game of chess (but it is a fixed game) if you take it together with the changes in NHS funding (GPs will now be given the money to spend as they see fit)

Move 1: The governments aims to set he NHS provider prices higher than those likely to be offered by the private providers.

Move 2: The GPs (primary fund holder) will favour private providers for services on the base of cost.

Move 3: Local NHS service create massive deficit due to loss of income

Move 4: Private providers make a bid to take over local NHS on the basis of economic failure

Move 5: Local service are been taken over, assets striped and amalgamated to private sector

Move 6: Now you have a Private monopoly that can increase prices to cover the takeover expences

Move 7: No NHS but in name Check Mate

The clearest indication that the government want to privatise service is the private patient income cap for foundation Trusts.

In simple term, Foundations trusts can go after private patients but up to a point. This leaves some business for outside private providers. The latest changes in the regulation of foundation trust make them independent of the NHS control. By removing the cap they can go after the private market slice in the expense of the NHS service which will always provide very little profit compared to private patients. So if the income cap goes ahead foundations trusts become private business that will not give a good service to NHS patients or if the cap does not go on they make no profit and then the existing private companies take them over. Either way the end game is the same. No free NHS.

More evidence will appear as I find them but the game is fixed

What can you do?

Feel free to copy this and send it to all you know. The only weapon we have to save the NHS is mass movement. Private companies have the money and lobbyist we have the people.

Let us unmask these and see who they have talking with in government. It would be interesting to see the financial statements of the MPs in bed with these lobbyists

Here are some of these lobbyists

H5 Healthcare Alliance will represent the interests of private healthcare

Private healthcare alliance formed in July 30, 2010 and it is a new trade body designed to promote the benefits of private healthcare.

The H5 Healthcare Alliance is to represent the five largest private hospital groups in the UK and is to be publicly launched in September 2010 after the parliamentary recess has come to an end.

Richard Jones, who will be chief executive of the group, said : "We have been set up to promote the benefits of private healthcare and to influence politicians and relevant policymakers in light of the significant changes that the new government is introducing."

Recently, Michael Payne, general secretary for the Association of Medical Insurance Intermediaries, predicted to FT Adviser that more people will be looking for private healthcare in the near future. He stated that talks with members of the government left him with the impression that the increased uptake will be driven by the NHS having to limit the number of services and treatments it provides to patients for free.

Version:1.0 StartHTML:0000000105 EndHTML:0000012495 StartFragment:0000003787 EndFragment:0000012459

September 2010

A must see YouTube explanation on the implications of NHS financing.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sNiruX2gZDc

the video by richardblogger | August 10, 2010 explains how the government's NHS White paper will result in the privatisation of the majority of the NHS. The government has no mandate to do this. Please contact your MP and tell him or her that you are not in favour of these plans.

The first signs of discontent

Things are getting interesting in the NHS front.

Here is some of the background: NHS hospitals have been attacking their resident pathology services for some years now, initially by throttling investment, appointing arrogant and inept upper management and by ensuring that internal financing of pathology tests, “silo budgeting” was stack in favor of clinical departments.

To explain, in every hospital, a budget is allocated to individual clinical services, e.g gastroenterology, respiratory, GUM, etc. They then negotiate with pathology managers how much money they will give to pathology to do a set number of tests. Unfortunately, IT (computer) systems in every hospital are so bad that there is no way of finding out accurately if some departments are ordering more tests than agreed. As a result, pathology departments overspend because they do more tests than they are paid to do.

The answer from pathology and hospital management is that Pathology departments are useless and the only answer is to privatise them. This is what happened in London with UCH (taken over by the private the doctors laboratory), Guy’s and St Thomas’s (taken over by SERCO) and this is what they are trying to do with Kingspath (SERCO is trying to take them over).

How can they do this without anyone knowing about it?

Very simple, individuals that work in pathology departments have a high sense of responsibility for their role in patient well being. As a result, they never strike. Therefore, in managerial terms, they are easy to pick a fight with since they will never fight back. It looks as if this is the end of the line and I can foresee that the fight back starts now.

- Pathology staff at King College Hospital, (Kingspath), a name given to Kings pathology services by McKinsey & Company after a fee of £790,000, are being balloted Unite Union for a strike (the announcement from the Union is headed: Staff to ballot on industrial action to halt London hospital pathology privatisation ). If this goes ahead, I can see this spreading. Not only in response to a privatization threat but also in response to another sneaky drive by management, to downgrade all pathology staff one grade bellow their existing grade which in some cases translates 20% reduction in salary. This, is done under the pretext of reorganization and currently two NHS trusts pathology departments in London are undergoing through this process: Imperial College NHS Healthcare Trust and Barts and the London. By the way, Imperial College Faculty of Medicine was the same institution that came under criticism after making redundant 63 academic staff in a very bloody Tuesday (most staff informed by email and some were told that in two weeks they will have to vacate their office). Downgrading, also has a secondary objective; to make the department more attractive to private companies. I would not be surprised if both of the departments mentioned are to be privatised soon after their restructure.

The next service to be privatised is physiotherapy. Private companies are already taking over these services in all major hospitals so by next year most pysio services will be private linked.

Here is what the Conservative think-tank think on the NHS:

06/20/2010

'How to save the NHS £12bn in one year without stopping a single operation'

The 2020Health think tank is launching a report - Cutting the costs without cancelling the Services - which outlines ways to save the NHS £12bn in one year.

2020Health is led by Julia Manning, a member of the Tory candidates list, and enjoys close links to Andrew Lansley, the Health secretary. Commenting on the report - written jointly with Gail Beer and Emma Hill - Ms Manning states:

“The NHS can deliver £12 billion in savings over the next year which can be re-invested in new technology and elderly care... There is no need for health trusts to make rash decisions, cancelling operations or axing doctors which will permanently affect clinical outcomes for patients. These savings can be made ahead of the longer term changes that will save money such as reconfiguration of services, reducing practice variation, reducing low-level demand and opening up more competition.”

The following economies are among some of those suggested:

• Merging emergency services administration – SAVE £14.4m (This also assumes the loss of personnel so do not be surprised if the queues increase the service deteriorates to dangerous levels. They savings will disappear after relatives start taking hospitals to court over causes of unnecessary death and suffering. Estimated INCREASED COST £110m to the taxpayer)
• Investing to improve staff’s health and wellbeing, reduce sickness absence and so cut agency worker’s costs – SAVE £555m (Agency staff is already in the lowest level and those present fill vacant posts that can not be filled due to recruitment freeze. Estimated SAVE only £60 whilst creating safety gaps in the service)
• Forcing mergers of pathology labs to save duplication – SAVE £880m (most small pathology departments already outsource their services leaving only very few feasible mergers. SAVINGS £23m but with worse turnaround times for results, increasing waiting lists and putting some patients at risk (see potential litigation cost above))
• 5% across the board pay cut for all NHS staff for just one year – SAVE £1.8bn (They are doing this already. Consultants have had their PAs reduced, and senior staff are being "restructured" either loosing their jobs or being downgraded. Lower payed staff tent to loose their jobs rather than being downgraded.)
• Withholding hospital payments for hospital acquired infections – SAVE £150m (Then the hospitals will be in loose funding and become vulnerable to takeover by private organizations to whom the government is prepared to provide financial incentives.)
• Slashing management spend - SAVE £1.5bn (This must be done. However, they should also remove all unnecessary red tape and paper shuffling associated with their posts)
• Enhancing NHS counter fraud measures, encouraging trusts to see fraud as a business risk - SAVE £1bn (there is little loss through this. well bellow the 1bn estimate. More likely to be 230m)
• Halting any new building plans - SAVE £800 million
• Making NHS IT fit for purpose - SAVE £2bn (makes no sense. it says nothing)
• Reducing dependency on prescriptions and medicines waste – SAVE £1.6bn (It will take two generations to see the effects on the NHS end. Savings will never materialize)

More soon.

Here are some more interesting links

Privatisation and the NHS

David Cameron meets NHS privatisation campaigners - Telegraph

Divided BMA votes to attack white paper as 'smokescreen

£64bn NHS privatisation plan revealed | Society | The Guardian

Government Strategy Towards NHS Privatisation Via GP Doctors