Friday 9th January 2015

Post by **refitman** » Fri 09 Jan, 2015 7:33 am

Morning all. Conservatives and Labour tied on Yougov:

Latest YouGov / The Sun results 8th January -

Con 33%, (+1)
Lab 33%, (nc)
LD 8%, (+1)
UKIP 13%, (-2)
GRN 7%; (nc)

APP -21 (-1)

Post by **refitman** » Fri 09 Jan, 2015 7:34 am

On the Guardian news ticker:

Breaking news: Circle says it will pull out of contract to manage first privately run hospital in UK, Hinchingbrooke in Cambridgeshire, blaming funding cuts and A&E demand. More details soon…

Spacedone · Post by **Spacedone** » Fri 09 Jan, 2015 7:39 am

refitman wrote:On the Guardian news ticker:
Breaking news: Circle says it will pull out of contract to manage first privately run hospital in UK, Hinchingbrooke in Cambridgeshire, blaming funding cuts and A&E demand. More details soon…

Evidence if any were needed that you don't hand over hospitals to private companies. No one interested in the health of their patients just walks away when things are tough. Clearly not enough profit for them.

TechnicalEphemera · Post by **TechnicalEphemera** » Fri 09 Jan, 2015 7:51 am

Spacedone wrote:
refitman wrote:On the Guardian news ticker:
Breaking news: Circle says it will pull out of contract to manage first privately run hospital in UK, Hinchingbrooke in Cambridgeshire, blaming funding cuts and A&E demand. More details soon…
Evidence if any were needed that you don't hand over hospitals to private companies. No one interested in the health of their patients just walks away when things are tough. Clearly not enough profit for them.

They should be banned from all future health contracts, not that I want there to be any.

LadyCentauria · Post by **LadyCentauria** » Fri 09 Jan, 2015 7:53 am

refitman wrote:On the Guardian news ticker:
Breaking news: Circle says it will pull out of contract to manage first privately run hospital in UK, Hinchingbrooke in Cambridgeshire, blaming funding cuts and A&E demand. More details soon…

Cripes! That's a bit of a shocker to start the day. I wonder, does their contract gave financial penalties tied into it? I ask (not expecting an answer because of commercial confidentiality) because if they are willing to pay to break their contract, then things there are dire indeed.

Good morning! Is it ok (she asks) that while watching the seriously serious division of the Gendarmerie piling into Longpont and Corcy, on France 24, all I could think of was a sudden sort-of-homesickness that swept over me (it reminded me so much of the village my late uncle and aunt lived in) and how much I'd like to live there; and how much that house with the for-sale signs might be? It quite took my mind off things, for quite a while, as I swam in nostalgia and WhatIWouldDoIfIWonMillions...

DonutHingeParty · Post by **DonutHingeParty** » Fri 09 Jan, 2015 7:58 am

Poor old Andrew Turner, Conservative MP for the Isle of Wight. I remember he had the floor after the bedroom tax and was trying to make a valid speech about the cost of Solent crossings, but no-one was interested. He's now been kicked out his house on the island whilst his wife and her new lover moved in, and his wife, who is also his secretary, apparently can't be let go because of employment law, and doesn't want to resign. Now his own constituency association are putting up a challenge, saying he's too "weak" to stand for election. I feel sorry for the fella. Full story in the Telegraph.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Fri 09 Jan, 2015 8:04 am

About to listen to the boss of Circle tell Radio 4 why they've decided to pull out ... I'm sure that's going to be a thorough and edifying interview. Someone remind me which of our honourable MPs have interests in Circle? I'm sure there must be some. There's almost nothing that they don't have their grubby mitts in.

Morning all.

danesclose · Post by **danesclose** » Fri 09 Jan, 2015 8:28 am

DonutHingeParty wrote:Poor old Andrew Turner, Conservative MP for the Isle of Wight. I remember he had the floor after the bedroom tax and was trying to make a valid speech about the cost of Solent crossings, but no-one was interested. He's now been kicked out his house on the island whilst his wife and her new lover moved in, and his wife, who is also his secretary, apparently can't be let go because of employment law, and doesn't want to resign. Now his own constituency association are putting up a challenge, saying he's too "weak" to stand for election. I feel sorry for the fella. Full story in the Telegraph.

There's an in-depth article about it in the latest Private Eye detailing the soap opera-style machinations between Turner, his ex-fiancee & her lover .
Don't feel too sorry for Turner- he claimed £100,000 in expenses for his house on the IoW.

danesclose · Post by **danesclose** » Fri 09 Jan, 2015 8:29 am

Apologies - Good morning all.
My general bonhomie was dealt a shattering blow this morning when I turned on BBC Breakfast to see the towel-refolder-in-chief

LadyCentauria · Post by **LadyCentauria** » Fri 09 Jan, 2015 8:35 am

danesclose wrote:Apologies - Good morning all.
My general bonhomie was dealt a shattering blow this morning when I turned on BBC Breakfast to see the towel-refolder-in-chief

Was he there to campaign for the re-folding of towels before leaving bathrooms? 'Tis a terrible hazard, a soggy towel wantonly strewn across a bathroom floor. Especially if you encounter it whilst wearing slip-on slippers...

danesclose · Post by **danesclose** » Fri 09 Jan, 2015 8:35 am

rebeccariots2 wrote:About to listen to the boss of Circle tell Radio 4 why they've decided to pull out ... I'm sure that's going to be a thorough and edifying interview. Someone remind me which of our honourable MPs have interests in Circle? I'm sure there must be some. There's almost nothing that they don't have their grubby mitts in.

Morning all.

I wonder will that Tory shrill who keeps on about NHS failings (rusty??) be over on the Guardian today?

55DegreesNorth · Post by **55DegreesNorth** » Fri 09 Jan, 2015 8:39 am

Morning folks,
http://www.thejournal.co.uk/north-east- ... ol-8406207

Let's hope this happens across the country.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Fri 09 Jan, 2015 8:40 am

CEO of Circle - 3 key factors in finding running Hinchinbrooke unsustainable
Combination of factors:
Unprecedented rise in demand for A & E (30% in last year) and other services
10% funding cuts
One of first hospitals to go through substantial reform (govt imposed?) and found this impacted on ability to cope

Environment they find themselves in today is very very different from 2010 when they signed up to their contract.

Editing to add: But the G's report says they have put in / lost £4.84m of their own money - and their contract stated they could withdraw if they 'lost' £5m. So the central reason for bailing out is, of course, money. If they can't make a profit - they're not going to be involved as a private company are they?

Toby Latimer · Post by **Toby Latimer** » Fri 09 Jan, 2015 8:44 am

Re Hinchingbrooke - are the likes of Richard Branson or Mike Parish (Care UK) likely to step in ? Or that other Fat Cat asset stripper / Tory donor Jon Moulton ?
Another tax payer bail out ?

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Fri 09 Jan, 2015 8:44 am

Patrick Wintour ‏@patrickwintour 52m52 minutes ago
Who privatised Hinchingbrooke Hospital ? Clegg says it was Andy Burnham, but shadow health secretary denies this. http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/20 ... nhs-record" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; …

Andy Burnham ‏@andyburnhammp 2m2 minutes ago
.@patrickwintour There's no debate about it, Patrick: the Coalition appointed Circle. Their NHS policy is unravelling before our eyes.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Fri 09 Jan, 2015 8:48 am

Mike Gapes MP retweeted
Adam Parsons ‏@AdamParsons1 49m49 minutes ago
Reasons given for Circle exit of Hinchingbrooke:
1 - Pressure on A&E
2 - Cuts in funding
3 - CQC relationship

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Fri 09 Jan, 2015 8:51 am

Isabel Hardman retweeted
David Williams @dwilliamsHSJ · 8m 8 minutes ago
@IsabelHardman for competn you need excess capacity priced in. But the NHS cuts prices every year cos funding doesnt keep pace with demand.

Isabel Hardman @IsabelHardman · 7m 7 minutes ago
@dwilliamsHSJ so system will not work for competition even if some involved want it?

frightful_oik · Post by **frightful_oik** » Fri 09 Jan, 2015 8:59 am

So the Beeb have boss of circle and a Tory MP, (to bash the unions). Balanced?

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Fri 09 Jan, 2015 9:04 am

Tim Montgomerie ن @montie · 9h 9 hours ago
Problems of NHS being blamed on the pointless NHS reorganisation on #bbcqt rather than demography or the deficit.Lansley's terrible mistake.

It was actually one of the more interesting 'episodes' of Question Time. Couple of strangely worded questions from the audience though ... the problems with the NHS framed as proving how inefficient a big monolithic structure is. But thankfully - more sense and less bias coming out in the answers and from other members of the audience.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Fri 09 Jan, 2015 9:06 am

frightful_oik wrote:So the Beeb have boss of circle and a Tory MP, (to bash the unions). Balanced?

Of course not. But then they gave Gove a little Tory showcase slot all of his own on Newsnight the other day - completely unchallenged and far too long. He was simpering with pleasure at the attention and opportunity to whisper sweet poison.

Toby Latimer · Post by **Toby Latimer** » Fri 09 Jan, 2015 9:07 am

Occasional Graun contributor Sue Marsh, who despite having severe health problems of her own & has worked tirelessly for several years as a disability campaigner and done loads to bring about change to the unfair sham 'work capability assessment' is going to work for the contracted Maximus group who replaced ATOS

From today, I will be responsible for making sure that as many of those improvements are made during this period of change and pause as possible. MAXIMUS have asked me to be their Head of Customer Experience, and it seems, have given me fairly free reign to devise a strategy to bring about a wide range of improvements to the service from a customer perspective

http://diaryofabenefitscrounger.blogspo ... l?spref=tw" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Fri 09 Jan, 2015 9:09 am

rebeccariots2 wrote:About to listen to the boss of Circle tell Radio 4 why they've decided to pull out ... I'm sure that's going to be a thorough and edifying interview. Someone remind me which of our honourable MPs have interests in Circle? I'm sure there must be some. There's almost nothing that they don't have their grubby mitts in.

Morning all.

Rees-Mogg jumps out as having questionable links to Circle. There was even an article in the local press as recently as last November after Unite compiled a list of links between MPs and Peers and companies that have directly benefited from the Health care reforms:

http://www.somersetguardian.co.uk/Jacob ... story.html

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Fri 09 Jan, 2015 9:47 am

Morning.

Not entirely unexpected, from the Guardian breaking news red banner:

''Breaking news:
A&E performance sank to new record low last week, with emergency departments in England treating 79.8% of patients within four hours. More details soon …''

Maybe I'm being cynical but can't help thinking the Coalition will be sighing in relief that the Paris terrorist story is the headline grabber at the moment.

Lonewolfie · Post by **Lonewolfie** » Fri 09 Jan, 2015 9:55 am

refitman wrote:On the Guardian news ticker:
Breaking news: Circle says it will pull out of contract to manage first privately run hospital in UK, Hinchingbrooke in Cambridgeshire, blaming funding cuts and A&E demand. More details soon…

IIRC, the reason for 'privatisation' was a £120m 'black hole' in the hospitals' funding....created by 'management accounting error' (but of course, now referred to by the MSM as 'debt-ridden' Hinchinbrooke) - I still believe(TM) that it's more a case of finding/manufacturing any reason to rush through privatisation because if they actually answered questions or provided facts and evidence about what they were/are doing the incompetence and greed would be seen by all...and the quicker they can keep things moving the less they have to explain

@Anatoly: Blair isn't going to face "war crimes charges" - lets knock that one on the head right away shall we?

Fair enough, Anatoly - but as you know, I live in Hope and some of my dreams might come true

...and anything that picks away at the Murkydochian shroud of protection for Tory Blur (and his 'legacy') is, in my opinion, a good thing.

...and morning all!

Lonewolfie · Post by **Lonewolfie** » Fri 09 Jan, 2015 10:05 am

Toby Latimer wrote:Occasional Graun contributor Sue Marsh, who despite having severe health problems of her own & has worked tirelessly for several years as a disability campaigner and done loads to bring about change to the unfair sham 'work capability assessment' is going to work for the contracted Maximus group who replaced ATOS

From today, I will be responsible for making sure that as many of those improvements are made during this period of change and pause as possible. MAXIMUS have asked me to be their Head of Customer Experience, and it seems, have given me fairly free reign to devise a strategy to bring about a wide range of improvements to the service from a customer perspective

http://diaryofabenefitscrounger.blogspo ... l?spref=tw" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I can't help feeling a cold shiver - Sue Marsh has been excellent in trying to hold the ConDemNation dimwittery to account - but 'Customer' experience? I still believe(TM) that to refer to claimants as 'customers' is neo-liberalism writ large - claimants are humans first - 'customer' evokes corporate power...and Maximus? Really? Smacks of corporate news management and 'we're listening to you, our customers, and your concerns' (but secretly, we DGAF as long as it looks good in the press and the profits from Government contracts keeps flowing into our, and our investors, pockets)

ephemerid · Post by **ephemerid** » Fri 09 Jan, 2015 10:47 am

Re. Circle - I am not surprised by this.

The original tendering process began under Labour (as all the right-wing frothers keep telling us) but the contract was substantially changed by Lansley in November 2010 (when the NHS group pulled out of the process) and Circle was given the deal.
In a way, I'm grateful to Circle - it has made it clear that, despite a sweetheart deal, at least two funding top-ups from the government, plus more cash from it's shareholders, it still can't make things work because there are simply insufficient resources for the job.

They've done us a favour, in a way - they have proved that under the current government and due to many of its reforms, it's not possible to break even (let alone make a profit) and provide the services its contract stipulates, even if it gets extra cash from wherever.
What this shows is that whoever is providing NHS care, even when central government throws a few million at them from time to time, they can't do what they're being asked to do because it simply isn't enough.

So Circle can't run an acute hospital on a better deal than normal NHS trusts; we already know that the likes of Serco and Harmoni can't run GP services as they regularly fail to meet their contractual obligations; and due to commercial confidentiality, there's a lot of performance stuff we can't find out about, but which I'd be willing to bet would show that Circle's experience is being replicated in other services.
There has been a lot of criticism about privatised home care services refusing to take on their ex-clients after they have been in hospital, and that is contributing to bed-blocking and pressure on A&Es all over the UK; there is justified criticism of the 111 service which is very quick to advise a trip to A&E because its call-handlers are untrained (unlike the triage nurses of NHS Direct) putting more pressure on acute trusts.

It must be obvious to everyone by now that privatising the NHS has not worked where it has been attempted and just caused chaos.

TheGrimSqueaker · Post by **TheGrimSqueaker** » Fri 09 Jan, 2015 10:54 am

Lonewolfie wrote:
refitman wrote:On the Guardian news ticker:
Breaking news: Circle says it will pull out of contract to manage first privately run hospital in UK, Hinchingbrooke in Cambridgeshire, blaming funding cuts and A&E demand. More details soon…
IIRC, the reason for 'privatisation' was a £120m 'black hole' in the hospitals' funding....created by 'management accounting error' (but of course, now referred to by the MSM as 'debt-ridden' Hinchinbrooke) ......

Slightly more complicated than that, and there is a lot of disinformation floating around so it is difficult to get a clear story uness you knwo some of the people on the ground; which I do, so .....

Hinchingbrooke was administered by Hinchingbrooke Health Care NHS Trust and although it was running at a deficit (as were most trusts) things were manageable and plans were in place for continued growth; HHCT's debt was around £14m, and the people running it were actively tackling the problem. But then they were forced, shotgun wedding-style, into a merger with Cambridgeshire PCT (who were £51m in debt, and still digging) with the rationale that savings could be made by economies of scale; part of the deal was that the Cambridge hospitals would refer patients to Hinchingbrooke's Treatment Centre which, under the Payment By Results scheme, would mean the Hospital would actually be running at a surplus.

Of course nobody at HHCT believed for one moment that would happen, and management and unions alike fought against the merger, to no avail. And, predictably, the Cambridge hospitals reneged on their side of the deal which meant that Hinchingbrooke, saddled with extra Cambridgeshire debt, saw their funding cut further and then still further to provide money for NHS patients to use private hospitals. So the hole got deeper and deeper and, by the time Burnham came along, something drastic needed to be done. So he started the process that led ultimately to Circle taking over, but my friends are clear that their impression was he intended it to be an NHS provider most likely to get the contract, and that this was a way of ensuring the hospital was adequately funded.

Of course when the Coalition took office the NHS provider was squeezed out and the contract was given to Circle with all sorts of sweeteners involved; despite commercial confidentiality it seems that Circle were being given at least 50% more per annum in funding compared to HHCT and, of course, that announcement about the closure of the Stroke Unit just prior to the contract announcement was no coincidence - stroke care is long term, intensive work thus not cost effective or revenue earning, so had to go. Despite all of these sweeteners Circle have had to go back cap in hand to the DoH for extra funding more than once, have closed wards, demoralised staff and made it clear that big question marks hang over the future of both A & E and the Mat Unit.

With that level of funding the old HHCT would not have got into the debt problems, and could certainly have run the hospital better than Circle have; they proved that, over a long & difficult period. This morning I fear for the future of my friends, as their jobs are obviously now at risk (I can't imagine Hunt coming up with a sensible solution) and I feel for the people of the Hinchingbrooke area. Such a shame that Rusty is no longer in evidence at the Guardian, as I would have taken great delight in tearing him a new one this morning - you don't play these sorts of games with people's health, and it is long past time to stop doing so. We need Burnham now, instead we have a proven liar who believes in magic water.

danesclose · Post by **danesclose** » Fri 09 Jan, 2015 11:01 am

TheGrimSqueaker wrote:
Lonewolfie wrote:
refitman wrote:On the Guardian news ticker:
IIRC, the reason for 'privatisation' was a £120m 'black hole' in the hospitals' funding....created by 'management accounting error' (but of course, now referred to by the MSM as 'debt-ridden' Hinchinbrooke) ......
Slightly more complicated than that, and there is a lot of disinformation floating around so it is difficult to get a clear story uness you knwo some of the people on the ground; which I do, so .....

Hinchingbrooke was administered by Hinchingbrooke Health Care NHS Trust and although it was running at a deficit (as were most trusts) things were manageable and plans were in place for continued growth; HHCT's debt was around £14m, and the people running it were actively tackling the problem. But then they were forced, shotgun wedding-style, into a merger with Cambridgeshire PCT (who were £51m in debt, and still digging) with the rationale that savings could be made by economies of scale; part of the deal was that the Cambridge hospitals would refer patients to Hinchingbrooke's Treatment Centre which, under the Payment By Results scheme, would mean the Hospital would actually be running at a surplus.

Of course nobody at HHCT believed for one moment that would happen, and management and unions alike fought against the merger, to no avail. And, predictably, the Cambridge hospitals reneged on their side of the deal which meant that Hinchingbrooke, saddled with extra Cambridgeshire debt, saw their funding cut further and then still further to provide money for NHS patients to use private hospitals. So the hole got deeper and deeper and, by the time Burnham came along, something drastic needed to be done. So he started the process that led ultimately to Circle taking over, but my friends are clear that their impression was he intended it to be an NHS provider most likely to get the contract, and that this was a way of ensuring the hospital was adequately funded.

Of course when the Coalition took office the NHS provider was squeezed out and the contract was given to Circle with all sorts of sweeteners involved; despite commercial confidentiality it seems that Circle were being given at least 50% more per annum in funding compared to HHCT and, of course, that announcement about the closure of the Stroke Unit just prior to the contract announcement was no coincidence - stroke care is long term, intensive work thus not cost effective or revenue earning, so had to go. Despite all of these sweeteners Circle have had to go back cap in hand to the DoH for extra funding more than once, have closed wards, demoralised staff and made it clear that big question marks hang over the future of both A & E and the Mat Unit.

With that level of funding the old HHCT would not have got into the debt problems, and could certainly have run the hospital better than Circle have; they proved that, over a long & difficult period. This morning I fear for the future of my friends, as their jobs are obviously now at risk (I can't imagine Hunt coming up with a sensible solution) and I feel for the people of the Hinchingbrooke area. Such a shame that Rusty is no longer in evidence at the Guardian, as I would have taken great delight in tearing him a new one this morning - you don't play these sorts of games with people's health, and it is long past time to stop doing so. We need Burnham now, instead we have a proven liar who believes in magic water.

Thanks for the explanation in terms even I could understand.
Naturally enough the frothers are trying to blame Burnham

http://order-order.com/2015/01/09/hinch ... y-burnham/

TheGrimSqueaker · Post by **TheGrimSqueaker** » Fri 09 Jan, 2015 11:04 am

Lonewolfie wrote:
Toby Latimer wrote:Occasional Graun contributor Sue Marsh, who despite having severe health problems of her own & has worked tirelessly for several years as a disability campaigner and done loads to bring about change to the unfair sham 'work capability assessment' is going to work for the contracted Maximus group who replaced ATOS

From today, I will be responsible for making sure that as many of those improvements are made during this period of change and pause as possible. MAXIMUS have asked me to be their Head of Customer Experience, and it seems, have given me fairly free reign to devise a strategy to bring about a wide range of improvements to the service from a customer perspective

http://diaryofabenefitscrounger.blogspo ... l?spref=tw" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
I can't help feeling a cold shiver - Sue Marsh has been excellent in trying to hold the ConDemNation dimwittery to account - but 'Customer' experience? I still believe(TM) that to refer to claimants as 'customers' is neo-liberalism writ large - claimants are humans first - 'customer' evokes corporate power...and Maximus? Really? Smacks of corporate news management and 'we're listening to you, our customers, and your concerns' (but secretly, we DGAF as long as it looks good in the press and the profits from Government contracts keeps flowing into our, and our investors, pockets)

I doubt Sue took this step without much soul searching. I'm sure we'd all much rather that there was no ATOS/Maximus involved in the whole process but, as there is, having somebody like Sue on the inside & in a position to really rattle cages has to be some kind of positive, surely? The chances of Sue Marsh acting like some kind of meek corporate stooge is up there with the chances of me flying to the moon on the back of an inflatable pig.

TheGrimSqueaker · Post by **TheGrimSqueaker** » Fri 09 Jan, 2015 11:08 am

danesclose wrote:
TheGrimSqueaker wrote:
Lonewolfie wrote: IIRC, the reason for 'privatisation' was a £120m 'black hole' in the hospitals' funding....created by 'management accounting error' (but of course, now referred to by the MSM as 'debt-ridden' Hinchinbrooke) ......
Slightly more complicated than that, and there is a lot of disinformation floating around so it is difficult to get a clear story uness you knwo some of the people on the ground; which I do, so .....

Hinchingbrooke was administered by Hinchingbrooke Health Care NHS Trust and although it was running at a deficit (as were most trusts) things were manageable and plans were in place for continued growth; HHCT's debt was around £14m, and the people running it were actively tackling the problem. But then they were forced, shotgun wedding-style, into a merger with Cambridgeshire PCT (who were £51m in debt, and still digging) with the rationale that savings could be made by economies of scale; part of the deal was that the Cambridge hospitals would refer patients to Hinchingbrooke's Treatment Centre which, under the Payment By Results scheme, would mean the Hospital would actually be running at a surplus.

Of course nobody at HHCT believed for one moment that would happen, and management and unions alike fought against the merger, to no avail. And, predictably, the Cambridge hospitals reneged on their side of the deal which meant that Hinchingbrooke, saddled with extra Cambridgeshire debt, saw their funding cut further and then still further to provide money for NHS patients to use private hospitals. So the hole got deeper and deeper and, by the time Burnham came along, something drastic needed to be done. So he started the process that led ultimately to Circle taking over, but my friends are clear that their impression was he intended it to be an NHS provider most likely to get the contract, and that this was a way of ensuring the hospital was adequately funded.

Of course when the Coalition took office the NHS provider was squeezed out and the contract was given to Circle with all sorts of sweeteners involved; despite commercial confidentiality it seems that Circle were being given at least 50% more per annum in funding compared to HHCT and, of course, that announcement about the closure of the Stroke Unit just prior to the contract announcement was no coincidence - stroke care is long term, intensive work thus not cost effective or revenue earning, so had to go. Despite all of these sweeteners Circle have had to go back cap in hand to the DoH for extra funding more than once, have closed wards, demoralised staff and made it clear that big question marks hang over the future of both A & E and the Mat Unit.

With that level of funding the old HHCT would not have got into the debt problems, and could certainly have run the hospital better than Circle have; they proved that, over a long & difficult period. This morning I fear for the future of my friends, as their jobs are obviously now at risk (I can't imagine Hunt coming up with a sensible solution) and I feel for the people of the Hinchingbrooke area. Such a shame that Rusty is no longer in evidence at the Guardian, as I would have taken great delight in tearing him a new one this morning - you don't play these sorts of games with people's health, and it is long past time to stop doing so. We need Burnham now, instead we have a proven liar who believes in magic water.
Thanks for the explanation in terms even I could understand.
Naturally enough the frothers are trying to blame Burnham

http://order-order.com/2015/01/09/hinch ... y-burnham/

Of course they are, that was Rusty's favourite trick too. Burnham isn't totally blameless, he did set the ball rolling, but he had to work within the bounds set by his predecessors including the far more culpable Alan Johnson (aka Toby Helm's favourite); but everything he has said since 2012 convinces me that he has learned from those mistakes, something Hunt is incapable of doing.

ephemerid · Post by **ephemerid** » Fri 09 Jan, 2015 11:09 am

Re. Sue Marsh.

I've read her blogpost about her new job. I'm not sure what to think about this, frankly.

Maximus are not a nice company. Their record in the US shows that. They have also somehow finagled a deal that involves about £100 Million more a year than Atos got for the WCA - and Atos itself has a new £10 Million contract to supply the IT for Maximus (which I believe is due to the fact that they own or lease the LIMA software from Unum)

Maximus have also appointed Mike O'Donnell - previous medical director of Atos and before that clinical director of Unum in the UK - as their head of medical services in the UK. The CEO of Maximus in the UK has also said that all the Atos staff working on DWP assessments will be employed by Maximus, the Atos assessment centres will be taken over by Maximus.......basically, it's all pretty much the same.

However Sue intends to "improve the customer journey" or whatever blue-sky-thinking-management-speak-bollocks is the order of the day, she cannot do what needs to be done - ie. she cannot influence or change the WCA itself, the draconian rules, the ridiculous descriptors, the targets imposed on the assessors, or the stupidity of DWP decision makers. It's the WCA that has to change, not who delivers it.

I have every expectation that she will be required to adhere to the company line and will be expected to sign some sort of gagging contract.
I suspect that this appointment is a cynical move by Maximus to pretend that they care about sick and disabled people, and by placing a well-known campaigner on these issues in this job they probably think that people like me are reassured.

Well, I'm not reassured. I think Sue may well lose a lot of respect for this - I'm certainly not convinced by her arguments, though I appreciate that she has every right to believe otherwise.
Of course she will be paid a substantial salary, and that must always be a consideration for anyone with a family; but her role will be to research "customer experience" and suggest improvements (as the job description says) and for the life of me I cannot see how that squares with all her previous campaigning.

I feel we have lost a powerful voice - time will tell.

Toby Latimer · Post by **Toby Latimer** » Fri 09 Jan, 2015 11:13 am

1948 Public Information film on how National Insurance would deliver social welfare payments to those in need of assistance [youtube]H3GeNbKYqEw[/youtube]

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Fri 09 Jan, 2015 11:15 am

LadyCentauria wrote:
danesclose wrote:Apologies - Good morning all.
My general bonhomie was dealt a shattering blow this morning when I turned on BBC Breakfast to see the towel-refolder-in-chief
Was he there to campaign for the re-folding of towels before leaving bathrooms? 'Tis a terrible hazard, a soggy towel wantonly strewn across a bathroom floor. Especially if you encounter it whilst wearing slip-on slippers...

Brilliant.

I'm telling ya', sometimes the only way through a thing is getting there with humour.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Fri 09 Jan, 2015 11:22 am

Lonewolfie wrote:
Toby Latimer wrote:Occasional Graun contributor Sue Marsh, who despite having severe health problems of her own & has worked tirelessly for several years as a disability campaigner and done loads to bring about change to the unfair sham 'work capability assessment' is going to work for the contracted Maximus group who replaced ATOS

From today, I will be responsible for making sure that as many of those improvements are made during this period of change and pause as possible. MAXIMUS have asked me to be their Head of Customer Experience, and it seems, have given me fairly free reign to devise a strategy to bring about a wide range of improvements to the service from a customer perspective

http://diaryofabenefitscrounger.blogspo ... l?spref=tw" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
I can't help feeling a cold shiver - Sue Marsh has been excellent in trying to hold the ConDemNation dimwittery to account - but 'Customer' experience? I still believe(TM) that to refer to claimants as 'customers' is neo-liberalism writ large - claimants are humans first - 'customer' evokes corporate power...and Maximus? Really? Smacks of corporate news management and 'we're listening to you, our customers, and your concerns' (but secretly, we DGAF as long as it looks good in the press and the profits from Government contracts keeps flowing into our, and our investors, pockets)

I'm a Citizen, not a Customer.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Fri 09 Jan, 2015 11:24 am

Thoughts of going into coalition and (non)justification thereof come into mind,but a far more compromised position.I'm not happy with such thoughts.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Fri 09 Jan, 2015 11:33 am

Most probably I am somewhat naive in having faith in people ,that is my failing not theirs.Ever aware of who am I to judge.

TheGrimSqueaker · Post by **TheGrimSqueaker** » Fri 09 Jan, 2015 11:37 am

HindleA wrote:Most probably I am somewhat naive in having faith in people ,that is my failing not theirs.

Sometimes faith is preferable to despair. If that is naivety then, like you, I'm happy to be thought of as naive.

Lonewolfie · Post by **Lonewolfie** » Fri 09 Jan, 2015 11:43 am

danesclose wrote:
TheGrimSqueaker wrote:
Lonewolfie wrote: IIRC, the reason for 'privatisation' was a £120m 'black hole' in the hospitals' funding....created by 'management accounting error' (but of course, now referred to by the MSM as 'debt-ridden' Hinchinbrooke) ......
Slightly more complicated than that, and there is a lot of disinformation floating around so it is difficult to get a clear story uness you knwo some of the people on the ground; which I do, so .....

Hinchingbrooke was administered by Hinchingbrooke Health Care NHS Trust and although it was running at a deficit (as were most trusts) things were manageable and plans were in place for continued growth; HHCT's debt was around £14m, and the people running it were actively tackling the problem. But then they were forced, shotgun wedding-style, into a merger with Cambridgeshire PCT (who were £51m in debt, and still digging) with the rationale that savings could be made by economies of scale; part of the deal was that the Cambridge hospitals would refer patients to Hinchingbrooke's Treatment Centre which, under the Payment By Results scheme, would mean the Hospital would actually be running at a surplus.

Of course nobody at HHCT believed for one moment that would happen, and management and unions alike fought against the merger, to no avail. And, predictably, the Cambridge hospitals reneged on their side of the deal which meant that Hinchingbrooke, saddled with extra Cambridgeshire debt, saw their funding cut further and then still further to provide money for NHS patients to use private hospitals. So the hole got deeper and deeper and, by the time Burnham came along, something drastic needed to be done. So he started the process that led ultimately to Circle taking over, but my friends are clear that their impression was he intended it to be an NHS provider most likely to get the contract, and that this was a way of ensuring the hospital was adequately funded.

Of course when the Coalition took office the NHS provider was squeezed out and the contract was given to Circle with all sorts of sweeteners involved; despite commercial confidentiality it seems that Circle were being given at least 50% more per annum in funding compared to HHCT and, of course, that announcement about the closure of the Stroke Unit just prior to the contract announcement was no coincidence - stroke care is long term, intensive work thus not cost effective or revenue earning, so had to go. Despite all of these sweeteners Circle have had to go back cap in hand to the DoH for extra funding more than once, have closed wards, demoralised staff and made it clear that big question marks hang over the future of both A & E and the Mat Unit.

With that level of funding the old HHCT would not have got into the debt problems, and could certainly have run the hospital better than Circle have; they proved that, over a long & difficult period. This morning I fear for the future of my friends, as their jobs are obviously now at risk (I can't imagine Hunt coming up with a sensible solution) and I feel for the people of the Hinchingbrooke area. Such a shame that Rusty is no longer in evidence at the Guardian, as I would have taken great delight in tearing him a new one this morning - you don't play these sorts of games with people's health, and it is long past time to stop doing so. We need Burnham now, instead we have a proven liar who believes in magic water.
Thanks for the explanation in terms even I could understand.
Naturally enough the frothers are trying to blame Burnham

http://order-order.com/2015/01/09/hinch ... y-burnham/

...and thanks for the comprehensive clarification from me too! I can't help imagining (remembering) how much more effective the NHS would be (was) if (when) they talked about patients, healthcare and co-operation rather than customers, profit and competition

Lonewolfie · Post by **Lonewolfie** » Fri 09 Jan, 2015 11:47 am

TheGrimSqueaker wrote:
Lonewolfie wrote:
Toby Latimer wrote:Occasional Graun contributor Sue Marsh, who despite having severe health problems of her own & has worked tirelessly for several years as a disability campaigner and done loads to bring about change to the unfair sham 'work capability assessment' is going to work for the contracted Maximus group who replaced ATOS

http://diaryofabenefitscrounger.blogspo ... l?spref=tw" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
I can't help feeling a cold shiver - Sue Marsh has been excellent in trying to hold the ConDemNation dimwittery to account - but 'Customer' experience? I still believe(TM) that to refer to claimants as 'customers' is neo-liberalism writ large - claimants are humans first - 'customer' evokes corporate power...and Maximus? Really? Smacks of corporate news management and 'we're listening to you, our customers, and your concerns' (but secretly, we DGAF as long as it looks good in the press and the profits from Government contracts keeps flowing into our, and our investors, pockets)
I doubt Sue took this step without much soul searching. I'm sure we'd all much rather that there was no ATOS/Maximus involved in the whole process but, as there is, having somebody like Sue on the inside & in a position to really rattle cages has to be some kind of positive, surely? The chances of Sue Marsh acting like some kind of meek corporate stooge is up there with the chances of me flying to the moon on the back of an inflatable pig.

Sorry, but as Ephie says - how quickly will she have to sign a gagging clause? All the work she's done to highlight the inhuman actions of Fraud/IDS and his henchmen/women will be able to be sidelined with 'look - she works for us now - we're obviously great then, aren't we?'

As you know - I live in Hope and very much want to be wrong...but Maximus (or whoever they are today) have form.

StephenDolan · Post by **StephenDolan** » Fri 09 Jan, 2015 11:52 am

Morning all.

Thanks to all the excellent posters with their excellent postings today. This is why FTN is such a crucial resource for yours truly.

TheGrimSqueaker · Post by **TheGrimSqueaker** » Fri 09 Jan, 2015 12:00 pm

Lonewolfie wrote:
TheGrimSqueaker wrote:
Lonewolfie wrote: I can't help feeling a cold shiver - Sue Marsh has been excellent in trying to hold the ConDemNation dimwittery to account - but 'Customer' experience? I still believe(TM) that to refer to claimants as 'customers' is neo-liberalism writ large - claimants are humans first - 'customer' evokes corporate power...and Maximus? Really? Smacks of corporate news management and 'we're listening to you, our customers, and your concerns' (but secretly, we DGAF as long as it looks good in the press and the profits from Government contracts keeps flowing into our, and our investors, pockets)
I doubt Sue took this step without much soul searching. I'm sure we'd all much rather that there was no ATOS/Maximus involved in the whole process but, as there is, having somebody like Sue on the inside & in a position to really rattle cages has to be some kind of positive, surely? The chances of Sue Marsh acting like some kind of meek corporate stooge is up there with the chances of me flying to the moon on the back of an inflatable pig.
Sorry, but as Ephie says - how quickly will she have to sign a gagging clause? All the work she's done to highlight the inhuman actions of Fraud/IDS and his henchmen/women will be able to be sidelined with 'look - she works for us now - we're obviously great then, aren't we?'

As you know - I live in Hope and very much want to be wrong...but Maximus (or whoever they are today) have form.

Difficult one. Ephe's perspective is obviously different to mine, sadly all of this is more immediate for her, more real; and so, yes, maybe I'm just being naive but it hasn't stopped me fighting for change in what limited ways I can. We don't know, for example, that there will be a gagging clause, Sue may have made (will have made) all sorts of conditions when she took the role.

And I'm 100% with Ephe in saying the priority should not be to engage with ATOS/Maximus but to work for the scrapping of the WCA; I always thought that was Sue's position too but maybe she has decided that this was a decent and worthwhile first step on the road to that final victory. I don't know, I'm speculating but while Ephe is right more often than she is wrong I hope on this occasion she is wrong, not because that makes me right, but because it would be a win for all of us. And I'd probably better shut up now.

Toby Latimer · Post by **Toby Latimer** » Fri 09 Jan, 2015 12:04 pm

ephemerid wrote:Re. Sue Marsh.

I've read her blogpost about her new job. I'm not sure what to think about this, frankly.

Maximus are not a nice company. Their record in the US shows that. They have also somehow finagled a deal that involves about £100 Million more a year than Atos got for the WCA - and Atos itself has a new £10 Million contract to supply the IT for Maximus (which I believe is due to the fact that they own or lease the LIMA software from Unum)

Maximus have also appointed Mike O'Donnell - previous medical director of Atos and before that clinical director of Unum in the UK - as their head of medical services in the UK. The CEO of Maximus in the UK has also said that all the Atos staff working on DWP assessments will be employed by Maximus, the Atos assessment centres will be taken over by Maximus.......basically, it's all pretty much the same.

However Sue intends to "improve the customer journey" or whatever blue-sky-thinking-management-speak-bollocks is the order of the day, she cannot do what needs to be done - ie. she cannot influence or change the WCA itself, the draconian rules, the ridiculous descriptors, the targets imposed on the assessors, or the stupidity of DWP decision makers. It's the WCA that has to change, not who delivers it.

I have every expectation that she will be required to adhere to the company line and will be expected to sign some sort of gagging contract.
I suspect that this appointment is a cynical move by Maximus to pretend that they care about sick and disabled people, and by placing a well-known campaigner on these issues in this job they probably think that people like me are reassured.

Well, I'm not reassured. I think Sue may well lose a lot of respect for this - I'm certainly not convinced by her arguments, though I appreciate that she has every right to believe otherwise.
Of course she will be paid a substantial salary, and that must always be a consideration for anyone with a family; but her role will be to research "customer experience" and suggest improvements (as the job description says) and for the life of me I cannot see how that squares with all her previous campaigning.

I feel we have lost a powerful voice - time will tell.

I have mixed feelings to be honest, i was a bit taken aback when she first announced it this morning.She does have a huge online presence, and she also does have some important government contacts in her address book, she can only work within the boundaries and framework of what the assessment is. The WCA is the WCA is the WCA, the qualifying criteria or the 'descriptors' are set by the DWP.
On one hand I fear she will be constrained, and frustrated because of this, the department didn't listen to the Professor Harrington, in fact Grayling when he was IDS' understudy actually lied about the advice given and rolled it out from a pilot scheme for new applicants into a full blown monstrosity effecting millions of people.
The original, perhaps biggest petition against the WCA of recent years - the WOW petition started out as Pat Onions petition, we didn't even get the required amount of signatures in a year despite a heavy campaign, until it was relaunched for a second year by Francesca Martinez, even then after the debate that it triggered nothing much has changed.
Only the other day Samuel Miller tweeted 'This campaign is too reliant on social media and ends up preaching to the converted' which made me ponder a bit, I began to think that maybe we have gone as far as we can, and now in a bit of a rut or dead end do we we need a new approach ?
Maybe Maximus are thinking along the lines of Lyndon B Johnson when he said "Better to have your enemies inside the tent pissing out than outside the tent pissing in" but I don't think Sue is that gullible, she might make just that bit of difference especially if we do get a change of government in May, alongside the announcements on the WCA which Reeves has made.
Sue sure knows her stuff, my only concern is would it still be possible to have someone with her high profile working for the company performing the WCA while at the same time being a thorn in the side of whichever minister or secretary of state is going to ultimately be running the show. I don't think she has gone over to the dark side just yet, but she might find her hands are now tied.

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Fri 09 Jan, 2015 12:09 pm

StephenDolan wrote:Morning all.

Thanks to all the excellent posters with their excellent postings today. This is why FTN is such a crucial resource for yours truly.

Agree. Also noticed when I'm on Twitter that a lot of what is posted is old, and in some cases very old news and we FTNers were reading and talked about it on here as it happened.

Toby Latimer · Post by **Toby Latimer** » Fri 09 Jan, 2015 12:10 pm

Red's giving her both barrels on Twitter (i'm sure this guy used to be Red Miner on CIF)

: ScreenShot00265.jpg (115.04 KiB) Viewed 12791 times

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Fri 09 Jan, 2015 12:13 pm

Toby Latimer wrote:
ephemerid wrote:Re. Sue Marsh.

I've read her blogpost about her new job. I'm not sure what to think about this, frankly.

Maximus are not a nice company. Their record in the US shows that. They have also somehow finagled a deal that involves about £100 Million more a year than Atos got for the WCA - and Atos itself has a new £10 Million contract to supply the IT for Maximus (which I believe is due to the fact that they own or lease the LIMA software from Unum)

Maximus have also appointed Mike O'Donnell - previous medical director of Atos and before that clinical director of Unum in the UK - as their head of medical services in the UK. The CEO of Maximus in the UK has also said that all the Atos staff working on DWP assessments will be employed by Maximus, the Atos assessment centres will be taken over by Maximus.......basically, it's all pretty much the same.

However Sue intends to "improve the customer journey" or whatever blue-sky-thinking-management-speak-bollocks is the order of the day, she cannot do what needs to be done - ie. she cannot influence or change the WCA itself, the draconian rules, the ridiculous descriptors, the targets imposed on the assessors, or the stupidity of DWP decision makers. It's the WCA that has to change, not who delivers it.

I have every expectation that she will be required to adhere to the company line and will be expected to sign some sort of gagging contract.
I suspect that this appointment is a cynical move by Maximus to pretend that they care about sick and disabled people, and by placing a well-known campaigner on these issues in this job they probably think that people like me are reassured.

Well, I'm not reassured. I think Sue may well lose a lot of respect for this - I'm certainly not convinced by her arguments, though I appreciate that she has every right to believe otherwise.
Of course she will be paid a substantial salary, and that must always be a consideration for anyone with a family; but her role will be to research "customer experience" and suggest improvements (as the job description says) and for the life of me I cannot see how that squares with all her previous campaigning.

I feel we have lost a powerful voice - time will tell.
I have mixed feelings to be honest, i was a bit taken aback when she first announced it this morning.She does have a huge online presence, and she also does have some important government contacts in her address book, she can only work within the boundaries and framework of what the assessment is. The WCA is the WCA is the WCA, the qualifying criteria or the 'descriptors' are set by the DWP.
On one hand I fear she will be constrained, and frustrated because of this, the department didn't listen to the Professor Harrington, in fact Grayling when he was IDS' understudy actually lied about the advice given and rolled it out from a pilot scheme for new applicants into a full blown monstrosity effecting millions of people.
The original, perhaps biggest petition against the WCA of recent years - the WOW petition started out as Pat Onions petition, we didn't even get the required amount of signatures in a year despite a heavy campaign, until it was relaunched for a second year by Francesca Martinez, even then after the debate that it triggered nothing much has changed.
Only the other day Samuel Miller tweeted 'This campaign is too reliant on social media and ends up preaching to the converted' which made me ponder a bit, I began to think that maybe we have gone as far as we can, and now in a bit of a rut or dead end do we we need a new approach ?
Maybe Maximus are thinking along the lines of Lyndon B Johnson when he said "Better to have your enemies inside the tent pissing out than outside the tent pissing in" but I don't think Sue is that gullible, she might make just that bit of difference especially if we do get a change of government in May, alongside the announcements on the WCA which Reeves has made.
Sue sure knows her stuff, my only concern is would it still be possible to have someone with her high profile working for the company performing the WCA while at the same time being a thorn in the side of whichever minister or secretary of state is going to ultimately be running the show. I don't think she has gone over to the dark side just yet, but she might find her hands are now tied.

I can only think of an expression mum and dad were fond of using. 'He who pays the piper, calls the tune'. Sad but all too true.

Post by **letsskiptotheleft** » Fri 09 Jan, 2015 12:15 pm

Seems that Cameron has pulled out of the Leaders Live debates too, no reason given.

pk1 · Post by **pk1** » Fri 09 Jan, 2015 12:19 pm

David Cameron has decided that he doesn’t have enough time to take part in a live debate with young British people, six months after telling the group he was interested in taking part.

http://www.buzzfeed.com/sirajdatoo/davi ... f-the-lead" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Cluck cluck cluck

Post by **refitman** » Fri 09 Jan, 2015 12:20 pm

StephenDolan wrote:Morning all.

Thanks to all the excellent posters with their excellent postings today. This is why FTN is such a crucial resource for yours truly.

I very much second this.

Toby Latimer · Post by **Toby Latimer** » Fri 09 Jan, 2015 12:21 pm

Thanks ephie for the comments on Sue's blog, polite, informed and to the point as usual. If she does end up being assimilated into the Borg collective of Maximus/Atos/DWP then we have lost an important cog in the machinery of fighting for what is just and right.
What a beast of a year, with Bob Crow & Tony Benn no longer around too our voices are getting a bit thin on the ground.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Fri 09 Jan, 2015 12:26 pm

refitman wrote:
StephenDolan wrote:Morning all.

Thanks to all the excellent posters with their excellent postings today. This is why FTN is such a crucial resource for yours truly.
I very much second this.

Me too.

I'm a chronic button-thanks thumbs up pusher. Sometimes the page takes too long to re-load on my computer. I'm going to stop doing it so much. It doesn't mean I don't thank you or I haven't read your post.

love
JA