DoH urged to get tough over Sun blast

The Department of Health has been urged to stand up for NHS managers following an article in The Sun purporting to 'name and shame' the 'bosses running Britain's worst hospitals'.

A double-page spread claimed the nine chief executives of zero-starred trusts were delivering 'squalid wards, long waiting times for treatment and rockbottom staff morale' - even though many have good records in these areas and were zerostarred for other reasons.

A leader also claimed that in the private sector the chief executives would have 'been sacked long ago', although five of the nine were appointed this year and one, Peter Coles of Brighton and Sussex University Hospitals trust, started less than a month ago. The starratings awarded in July relate to performance for the year ending March 2004.

The NHS Confederation e-mailed the chief executives involved to offer its support when the story appeared last Thursday.

The e-mail described The Sun's work as 'appalling' and said it would be in touch with the paper and with Department of Health director of communications Sian Jarvis 'to ascertain how they will be responding'.

Royal Surrey County Hospital trust chief executive Matthew Swindells, mentioned in the article, said he was 'quite surprised'not to have been called by the DoH. 'If it was one of my staff, I would have called to say 'how is it going?' and 'are you coping?', ' he said.

Communications staff at the trusts involved said they were given about an hour to respond to queries from the newspaper.

None felt they were given the opportunity to explain how the star-ratings worked, or what had been done to address the reasons for their trusts being zero-rated.

Surrey and Sussex University Healthcare trust chief executive Ken Cunningham, also attacked in The Sun article, said he had phoned the paper to make sure it did not accuse him of perpetrating a waiting-list fiddle he had actually uncovered.

'I spoke about our star-rating and how we had only failed for three months of the year, but [the reporter] didn't seem very interested. She only wanted to know my salary and whether I was going to resign, ' he said.

Mr Cunningham said he had 'no problem' with journalists asking hard questions, but the article had been 'shoddy...unbalanced and unreasonable'. He was also concerned it would open the way for further attacks on the trust, which has just completed an unpopular service reconfiguration.

'I think we should act collectively to put the record straight, because it is difficult for any individual to do it. It would sound like sour grapes and the papers would pick us off. But the NHS Confederation and the DoH should push this, ' he argued.

Mr Swindells also felt The Sun's stance needed a robust response. 'I think there is going to be a lot of this in the run-up to the general election and we are just going to have to be brave, ' he said.

'That is fine as long as the DoH is brave as well. The problem is that some of the people in this story have taken on really tough jobs and [I hope this is not] the start of the DoH thinking that it is going to have to sack people in the next star-ratings.'

NHS Confederation policy director Nigel Edwards said The Sun's action 'makes the search for a better way of counting success and failure more urgent'. He also said people put in to manage failing trusts should be able to count on support, both from representative organisations and the DoH.

A DoH spokesman said 'We are thinking carefully about how to take this issue up with The Sun to ensure that they understand the role of management in turning around hospitals - which is precisely what The Sun wants for its readers.'

But he suggested that under Shifting the Balance of Power, local organisations needed to defend themselves against unfair criticism. 'We recognise the need for strong leadership from the centre, but the NHS needs to fight its own corner and sell its achievements when it is unfairly attacked.'

The Sun declined to comment.