Your browser is no longer supported

For the best possible experience using our website we recommend you upgrade to a newer version or another browser.

Close

Your browser is not accepting cookies. This means means you will have to log in each time you visit the site.
For the best experience of hsj.co.uk, please enable cookies.

We'll assume we have your consent to use cookies, for example so you won't need to log in each time you visit our site.
Learn more

Readers' letters

Letters to Health Service Journal's editor.
  • Ex London Ambulance chief to temporarily lead acute trust

    29 May, 2016 10:23 am

    Great news. Ann is a good Chief Exec and a decent person. Kate Grimes had ability but fatal flaws. She could and did undermine and intimidate staff, without even thinking. She was also a reactor and would point the finger and the gun at anyone rather than take the rap herself. Well done Kingston FT, you have done your staff a massive favour. Anon (obv)

  • Longstanding trust chief executive resigns

    29 May, 2016 7:03 am

    What a loss to the NHS. Another good executive with huge experience lost.

  • CCGs could face tighter scrutiny when tendering big contracts

    28 May, 2016 9:37 pm

    Dr Paul Watson led this - when it went failed he stepped away - it's his Modus operandi- he didn't get moved out of EOE SHA for nothing - just bullying

  • CCG barometer comment: Ever closer union?

    28 May, 2016 9:28 pm

    Nice words, but until the NHS stops setting annual financial targets based on the DEL it will remain a dream

  • Exclusive: BMA pushed for further concessions after juniors' contract deal agreed

    28 May, 2016 10:26 am

    Interesting timing of these articles. Whilst the HSJ felt publication in best interests of public, I suspect juniors are still much more disillusioned with DoH and govt than with the BMA. Will this release which (effectively undermines theJDCnegotoating position) make juniors less likely to accept contract- leading back to imposition or further acrimony NHS England also need to think long and hard about what is achievable within the financial constraints they have had imposed on them. Will achieving 22bn of cuts be worth it if care quality has dropped further and recruitment and retention has become even more difficult- senior leaders need to be forthright with ministers instead of toeing the line for peerages etc, and alienating their workforce in the process. This will make negotiations for AfC and consultants much trickier now, although I note that the NHS still has no qualms to freely fork out 6-7 figure sums for management consultancy- maybe time for a management consultancy pay cap....

  • Northern ambulance services form new alliance

    28 May, 2016 8:48 am

    Makes sence ....one step closer to a single national ambulance service?

  • STPs to set plans for specialised services overhaul

    28 May, 2016 8:41 am

    The U turn is complete - a complete shambles. Where is the resource and expertise to contract manage any agreed change ? Is this all going to happen in 6 weeks planning when NHSE has failed over 3 years ? NHSE commissioned specialised services on a provider basis not population and got into a mess of lack of contract control and failure to control new service growth. It is a provider led market with top teaching hospitals ignoring either commissioner requirements or economic constraints. They see themselves as "special" as well ! The STP /CCG new footprint has enough on it's plate sorting out acute re-configuration never mind the "special" ones as well. Nightmare and who seriously thinks this is going to work without the complete delegation of resources and responsibility. A very bad joke or yet another move of the deckchairs while the band plays on in acute land and politicians wonder how this is all going to be sorted. Personally time to move on after 30 years of this lack support and of grip from our leaders at the top. Laurel & Hardy beckons "another fine mess".

  • Exclusive: Huge leak reveals BMA plan to 'draw out' junior doctors dispute

    27 May, 2016 10:30 pm

    Some pretty cynical responses. As industrial disputes go, Malawana's leadership was spot on. He aimed very clearly at a safe contract. Plain time was the stakes not the endpoint, as his flexibility in bargaining demonstrates. I look forward to seeing DoH's private discussions in due course for a far more revealing read.

  • CCGs back down in face of private firm's competition challenge

    27 May, 2016 5:47 pm

    Well, given I attracted such a strength of response, I guess I have some right of reply... There's a big difference between what we'd 'like' to happen and what 'can' happen. This was pushed back because for the latter. I have dear friends at BHR, I have felt the pain expressed by clinicians who have gone through a roller coaster of a few years BUT... it doesn't alter a legal framework and a statutory requirement, if you choose to run a tender, to base your decision on the evidence at hand and your own due diligence processes. To let that go forgoes some of the core principles of UK and European law, as well as opening the system up to personal bias over due process. I would be astounded (and horrified) if you thought that was 'better'. If you don't like the system, lobby for a change in the system and rules - not complain because someone 'NHS' wasn't allowed to forego them. If a commercial provider ignored the rules, you'd be first to demand redress! For the record, I think BHR needs all the help it can get and I am sure this contract would have helped. That doesn't make it right though. It doesn't help when providers choose not to publish pertinent data they are expected/required to do (waits). I am sure it feels better in the short term to be below the radar but then you can't adopt a policy of not publishing because the results are bad and still expect commissioners to award you contracts. It makes their decision unsound.

  • NHS to face new patient safety investigations from autumn

    27 May, 2016 4:33 pm

    I am really pleased to read this important announcement and I sincerely hope these investigators are truly independent and the question is what happens if they find that the Trusts or CCGs are covering up and whom would they blame? I sincerely hope it is not the staff but the Board and the leaders. In a culture of bullying, intimidation, discrimination, blame, humiliation, naming and shaming even good staff become indifferent or are scared and frightened to tell the truth. Fear of media name calling, fear of regulators hounding you for genuine mistakes are all the reasons why good doctors, nurses and other hard working staff tell lies or cover up. I am not condoning these practices and as a Medical Director for 10 years, I have always been honest with patients, families and also with our staff. But reality of NHS does worry me and I sincerely hope these investigators hold the Trust leaders and governance to account if the culture of the organisation is no conducive for being honest. In a culture of naming, shaming, discipline, bullying and blaming cover up goes on. NHS must focus on culture, leadership, values and governance.