10 year plan for the NHS – Leeds KONP

The plan sets out how the NHS will use the extra £20.5bn a year by 2023-24 to drive improvements in the service over the next 10 years.

  • investment in “world class, cutting edge treatments,” including genomic tests for every child with cancer and artificial intelligence to potentially improve stroke diagnosis
  • a renewed focus on prevention to stop an estimated 85 000 premature deaths each year, including new dedicated alcohol and tobacco treatment services in hospitals, and an expansion of the diabetes prevention programme
  • a new guarantee that investment in primary, community, and mental health care will grow faster than the overall NHS budget2; the plan says this will include £4.5bn to fund integrated care across England
  • the “biggest ever” investment in mental health services, rising to at least £2.3bn a year by 2023-24,3 will include an expansion of community based services, including in schools, to help 345 000 more children and teenagers
  • a package of upgrades to improve neonatal services, including more specialists and expert nurses in units
  • extra investment in early detection in areas such as cancer and respiratory care
  • “every patient will have the right to online ‘digital’ GP consultations, and redesigned hospital support will be able to avoid up to a third of outpatient appointments – saving patients 30 million trips to hospital, and saving the NHS over £1 billion a year in new expenditure averted. GP practices – typically covering 30-50,000 people – will be funded to work together to deal with pressures in primary care and extend the range of convenient local services, creating genuinely integrated teams of GPs, community health and social care staff.”
  • The document warns that the H&SCA is damaging the NHS and stopping it from making vital improvements to the care patients receive.

Health Service Journal :

KONP website:

Rationing plan for 17 NHS treatments no longer to be commissioned by CCGs. Trusts are also urged to ‘grow their external (non-NHS) income’ and ‘work towards securing the benchmarked potential for commercial income growth’. They must set up systems to raise money by charging patients for treatment (‘overseas visitor cost recovery’) – a policy recently denounced by several medical Royal Colleges because of its impact on individual and public health.

The 44 discredited Sustainability and Transformation Plans, re-branded as Integrated Care Systems, will hold the regional budgets to control NHS Trusts. ‘Planning assumptions’ in each STP area are to be agreed by 14 January. Neither the STPs, nor the ICSs, nor the Long Term Plan has been mandated by an Act of Parliament, let alone by patients or healthworkers.

The private sector could gain control of individual ICSs through long term contracts to manage the entire health system within one region.

John Lister:

A depressing re-run of previous plans and gimmicks: the only novel proposals are for more central control and less accountability, for trusts to run more like and with private businesses seeking profits, and to raise money by undermining the principles and values of the NHS.

There is no reason to believe this plan, with even less local accountability and no serious plans for public consultation, will prove any more acceptable to the public or successful in implementation than the secretive STPs in 2016 or other previous failed efforts.

Campaigners have yet to see anything to recommend the new plans, or any indication NHS England is willing to come to grips with the crisis fuelled by chronic austerity limits on funding – or demand an end to chaos and fragmentation of the Health & Social Care Act.”

Kailesh Chand (GP; BMA)

Continuation of the NHS 2000 modernisation plan of the Tony Blair government. The end game is one where ‘NHS’ will simply be a ‘kitemark’ attached to institutions and activities of a system of private providers.

The whole of England is to be covered by integrated care systems (ICSs) in just over two years, with ICSs ‘central to delivery of the long-term plan’ which is essentially a market model of health care that can be taken over by the likes of Virgin and United Health.

ICSs and their focus on population health are seen as central to the plan: ‘triple integration’ – of primary and specialist care, physical and mental health services and social care. The private sector will be licking its lips at the prospect.

£20.5 billion funding will barely make up for eight years of austerity that have crippled the NHS and social care and undermined public health. The gap between policy rhetoric and supply has never been starker.

There is nothing in the plan’s outlined aspirations – keeping people out of hospital, caring for the vulnerable in the community, earlier diagnosis of treatable disease – that any right minded person wouldn’t want to do or make happen. The question is how are we going to meet the challenge? Where will the money and the personnel come from?

Analysis by the King’s Fund, the Health Foundation and the Nuffield Trust suggests the health service could be short of more than 350,000 staff if it continues to lose employees and cannot attract enough from abroad.

Advertisements

What the hell is happening in Halifax?

The People’s Commission in Calderdale has never been a People’s Commission, it was proposed by People then they were moved out of the way to allow management consultants and private healthcare providers to destroy NHS hospitals in favour of so-called ‘care at home’ despite the lack of evidence that it will work, despite the total disregard for people’s views (the few who actually knew a People’s Commission existed).

This is appalling http://www.energyroyd.org.uk/archives/14115

Press Release: MP connections to private healthcare in Yorkshire

Keep Our NHS public Leeds are concerned that 220 MPs and Lords have present or recent financial connections to private health care

A recent report by Social Investigations shows that 225 parliamentarians have recent or present financial private healthcare connections.

  • 145 Lords have recent or present financial connections to companies or individuals involved in healthcare.
  • 1 in 4 Conservative, 1 in 6 Labour and 1 in 10 Liberal Democrat Peers have recent or present financial connections to companies or individuals involved in healthcare.
  • 75 MPs have recent or present financial links to companies or individuals involved in private healthcare, 81% of these are Conservative.
  • 4 Key members of the Associate Parliamentary Health Group have parliamentarians with financial connections to companies or individuals involved in healthcare
  • 4 MPs and 1 Lord have worked for Huntsworth Health, run by a Peer who gave money to Cameron’s leadership campaign
  • 19 Lords and MPs have financial links to Pharmaceutical giant GlaxoSmithKline

The People’s March for the NHS passes through Yorkshire in just over a week.

Locally:

David Davies Conservative MP for Haltemprice and Howden and David Blunkett Labour MP for Sheffield, Brightside and Hillsborough both received a payment of £4,250 from Civica. Civica supplies software and IT solutions to over 250 NHS trusts in the UK. More than 70 NHS Commissioners use Civica Health & Social Care’s industry standard SLAM NHS Commissioning software to help manage service level agreements with providers, including Payment by Results, local tariffs, local agreements, block payments and other variants. David Blunkett also received a fee of his apparent going rate of £4,250 for a speech at Runwood Care homes.

Newly elected Green Councillor Terry Wilford said

“The NHS is concerned with healthcare provision and should not be subject to market forces either internal or external. The Green Party would halt the cancerous spread of a multi-tier market driven system of uneven provision that New Labour began with their introduction of foundation hospitals back in 2002 by fully reintegrating ‘Foundation Hospitals’ back into the NHS and repealing the ConDem coalitions 2012 Social care act that has accelerated the marketisation and privitisation of the NHS.”

More:

Ask your MP to say no to clause 119 – last chance, please act now !

If you haven’t already done so, contact your MP NOW.  Clause 119 will take away local decision making about your local hospital and put it into the hands of MPs who have private healthcare company interests.

There is no reason to downgrade and close hospitals, but Coalition MPs are not listening – they ignored over 30,000 people’s voices in Dewsbury last week and trying to close services in Halifax.

You won’t get another chance to keep your local hospital. Please take action.

Your MP needs to know what you think.

Their vote could also cost them their seat in 2015.

Leeds Keep Our NHS Public, Yorkshire National Health Action and other campaign groups will be closely following how Leeds and Yorkshire MPs vote. You can also contact your MP on twitter

 

200 beds at risk – say no to Mid Yorks NHS carve up !

If you have relatives and friends who use hospital services in Wakefield areas…

More details in Dead Weight researched by the excellent John Lister, some points

  • £38,000,000 implementation for services reorganisation but Trust will not be in financial balance even before 2017
  • Dewsbury A&E reduced to urgent care, Dewsbury hospital to deliver elective, rehabilitation only
  • £310,000,000 PFI scheme funded hospitals in Pinderfields and Pontefract so no beds closed because cost of PFI does not go down even when services are reduced
  • no details in the documentation about plans to establish new services
  • no details in the documentation about plans for patient flows
  • no details in the documentation about plans for alternative community services
  • no fixed timescale for Ernst & Young to complete their work
  • £4,000,000 spent on management consultants in the last year

Sign the Petition to stop Leeds Hospitals being closed undemocractically

Please sign the petition to stop Clause 118

Despite opposition from doctors, the British Medical Association and charities, the government is trying to rush through
changes to make it far easier to close hospitals without proper consultation.

If one hospital – even outside Leeds – has a review from CQC (e.g. this March) or other entity that considers its fate, other popular
and well-run hospitals in our area could be downgraded or shut down to balance the books, under the proposed new rules.

Recently a court ruling stopped Health Secretary Jeremy Hunt from closing Accident and Emergency and Maternity services at popular Lewisham Hospital in London. He used public money to take the well performing Lewisham to court and then used public money again for the appeal. He failed the appeal which was thrown out by the judge in 10 minutes and has now undemocratically attached a clause to a Care bill that was never designed for that purpose.

The government wants to remove the law that protected Lewisham and would protect other hospitals. If Clause 118 of the Care Bill, dubbed the ‘hospital closure clause’ becomes law in February, the fate of hospitals across the country could be taken out of our hands. We already know that the government is quietly reviewing the future of half the hospitals in the country.

If our hospital was threatened, this new law would give local people, doctors, and councillors little or no say in what happened to it. That’s an awful prospect.

The Royal College of Physicians has said that “handing powers to special administrators to make decisions about neighboring trusts is cause for concern.”

The UK already has fewer hospital beds than most developed countries. The British Medical Association opposes the hospital closure clause, saying it would allow the Health Secretary to “force changes through the back door”.

Writing in the British Medical Journal, Professor Allyson Pollock says that the clause will “undermine equal access to care in England” and removes “checks and balances designed to ensure that changes are in the interests of the communities affected” with centrally-appointed decision makers only having to think about money.

Public outcry now could force the government to change the worst aspects of the Bill – including the hospital closure clause – in its final stages early this year.

Will all of Leeds MPs press to get the Bill amended, and the hospital closure clause dropped,  will they help secure the future of Leeds hospital services in a democratic manner that supports local decision making?

Since 2012 the Health Secretary no longer has a duty to secure a comprehensive health service, but he wants more power to impose fast-track hospital closures with no reference to the views of local people. What happened to ‘no decision about me without me’?


Molloy C (2013), Hospital Closure Clause Battle Heats up today, OpenDemocracy, available at http://www.opendemocracy.net/ournhs/caroline-molloy/hospital-closure-clause-battle-heats-up-today