‘Brave’ Sir David stresses freedoms and delivery
As the NHS drowns in reform, the danger of distraction grows.
The point was driven home by the Commons health committee report on commissioning.
The same concern is woven between the lines of Sir David Nicholson’s first interview since being named as chief executive of the NHS Commissioning Board.
Talking to HSJ together with minister for quality Earl Howe, Sir David emphasised the freedoms the reforms hope to bring to commissioners and providers. Both were eager to stress the need to keep innovating through this period of change - urging NHS staff to attend March’s Healthcare Innovation Expo.
In the interests of full disclosure we should point out that HSJ’s parent company is involved in the marketing of the event. That said, we can state our belief that the Expo is a brave venture - especially at a time of financial constraint. It aims to highlight the most innovative solutions to the large scale problems afflicting the service.
It will no doubt attract its fair share of criticism for the cost incurred to stage it, but it would have been very easy for the Department of Health to step away from helping to spread new ideas just as it began a prerequisite of survival - let alone progress.
The other key message of Sir David’s interview is that he has no intention of letting consortia take up the reins until they have demonstrated the ability to deliver on QIPP. It would have been very easy for him to avoid admitting that the Commissioning Board must have the option of directly managing or reconfiguring consortia that did not come up to snuff. Indeed, his boss has spent the last nine months doing just that.
That Sir David did not dodge the question was welcome and another sign of his renewed influence over policy.
Have your say
You must sign in to make a comment.
Share
Readers' comments (6)
Anonymous | 19-Jan-2011 11:18 pm
Shame on you Alastair. You're using a catchy headline to promote your "Expo". Please don't compromise the integrity of our HSJ in this way.
Unsuitable or offensive?
Anonymous | 20-Jan-2011 6:54 am
Now I am understanding the light touch approach to the HSJ articles
Conflict of interest????
Unsuitable or offensive?
Anonymous | 20-Jan-2011 6:44 pm
Sycophantic? Why am I paying £12 a month for the HSJ/DH in house magazine? Has the HSJ lost all independence? Is the HSJ so reliant on conference advertising income it has lost the last shreds of objectivity and impartiality? What happened to journalism? What happened to investigating stories? What happened to opinion?
Or was this a poor attempt at sarcasm?
Unsuitable or offensive?
Alastair Mclellan | 21-Jan-2011 11:15 am
Dear Anon commentators
I don't see why HSJ's (arms length involvement) in the Expo should prevent me supporting an initiative which I believe benefits the NHS.
I can also promise you that the DH believes HSJ is anything but sycophantic. To quote TB, I have the scars on my back to prove it.
Alastair McLellan, Editor, HSJ
Unsuitable or offensive?
Anonymous | 23-Jan-2011 1:13 am
That is reassuring to know but it's not the commonly held view. HSJ offers the only real challenge to the DH and Government. When the HSJ does not show independence through editorial lines that are lacking in opinion, depth, or are unbalanced such as only printing what DH put in their press release, many believe you are the DH newsletter. The NHS confed rarely challenge. Which leaves TUs and they have another agenda.
When the BBC or Broadsheets offer better stories and more balance or even controversial comment, that makes interesting news. HSJ articles have limited wording, static statements, and alway quote the same usual suspects, if comments are made.
There isn't a better time to make some changes on the way the news is presented and perhaps be a voice for the many thousands that haven't and can't get one. Perhaps HSJ could start making the news for a change?
Unsuitable or offensive?
George Webb | 25-Jan-2011 10:42 am
Vote with your feet & do not renew your subscription if not satisfied. I am never sure who Anon is.
Unsuitable or offensive?