No to GP commissioning ... to ensure good decisions and to avoid conflicts of interest

MP's are heaping yet more pressure on the government now by suggesting GPs should not be allowed to take control of the budget all by themselves - take a look at this article in the Telegraph for instance.

The House of Commons' health committee said they should be joined by a range of staff including nurses and hospital doctors to decide how funds are spent.

The move would improve accountability and decision-making, with the MPs stating that the sole focus on family doctors involved in GP consortia is wrong.

Instead, they said the GP consortia should be re-named NHS commissioning authorities and be overseen by a board with representatives from other specialities.

"The expertise of other professionals was essential to ensure the best decisions were taken and to avoid conflicts of interest".

The MP's in the Health Committee are pointing out the obvious ... e.g. the need "to avoid conflicts of interest" ... Public health vs GP profits (from rationing healthcare).

NB their suggestion will not solve this problem entirely ... as a GP's decision to refer a person for treatment is taken in their head ... so most of the time people won't know whether their GP has rationed their care or not! Hence GP's should not be allowed to profit from decisions they make in any other way! NB if you think all GP's are honorable and trustworthy, just remember how they took the taxpayer to the cleaners the last time they re-negotiated their contracts (whilst dumping out of hours cover) ... which was unfortunately down to the incompetence of the last Government too!*

Let's see if the current Government, who said yesterday that they are 'pausing to listen', actually 'listen' ... or whether they're just trying to avoid a total massacre in the forthcoming local elections (before pressing on regardless).

* NB I raised this issue on Question Time at the time these changes were being pushed through, and a fellow blogger made the following point about a GP's recent comments on Question Time too. 

"In a recent BBC Question Time programme a GP from the area from which the programme was being broadcast stated that he was aware of a conspiracy amongst certain GP's to loot the NHS budget for their own financial interest, which, in his view would be detrimental to patient care".

Another honest and trustworthy GP "spilling the beans" and the public ignore this at their peril - as ignorance blinds ... but apathy kills!

BBC - Duty of Care ... and a Dereliction of Duty

To date the BBC has singularly (and deliberately) failed to address the fundamental issues raised by current NHS reforms ... e.g. rewarding GP's for rationing healthcare (a clear conflict of interest), as well all the other fundamental issues raised by every medical professional body (e.g. British Medical Association, Royal College of Surgeons, Royal College of Nursing etc etc)

In my humble opinion this is not only a dereliction of duty, but also points towards a deliberate conspiracy between the BBC and the Government, which is allowing the Government to press ahead with controversial and detrimental NHS reforms which affect everyone's health and well-being, and destroy the NHS. For instance, ask yourself why the Government are trying hard to bribe the greedy GP's to take part (with lucrative personal rewards for implementing it) ... and why all the true, honest, trustworthy and honorable GP's are so against it.

Current NHS reform were not asked for, or voted for, by anyone ... yet are being pushed through rapidly by this Government regardless of all the concerns raised by professional bodies and the general public. The introduction of the NHS was a key moment in UK history, and its destruction is equally as dramatic. Yet the BBC are failing to cover this issue in any real way (despite the public repeatedly asking them to). Nick Robinson is conveniently (for the Government) and deliberately not addressing it, preferring to focus all his attention on Libya instead, and the BBC's health correspondent, Fergus Walsh, is not addressing the issue either (despite his stated aim of wanting to look into the future and into the ethical issues associated with healthcare in particular).

Here is what I have posted on his blog when discussing the sharing/adoption of good practice (nb my post, the first post in response to his blog, was referred to their moderators rather than posted, despite the fact it broke no house rules ... and was then left that way!) 

Hospital managers also have a responsibility to adopt world class leadership and management practices ... but unfortunately such practices are almost completely opposite to what most managers currently understand/practice! However in leading hospitals the adoption of 21st century practices is quietly (and successfully) transforming patient outcomes, radically improving patient care and reducing unnecessary stress for both patients and staff. The problem is this type of 'management' is radically different to 'traditional management' ... and needs far less 'management' ... which perhaps goes some way to explaining why some managers are rather slow to spot it and adopt it! (i.e. it's a mixture of ignorance, apathy and self interest on the part of leaders and managers). Why don't you have a look into this area as well?

PS Why are you not also blogging about the ethics of profits v patient care (e.g. rewarding GP's for rationing healthcare)? IMHO if this blog is worth anything at all it should really be tackling this. Or is this an 'agreed no go-area' for the BBC! I note Nick Robinson is also completely avoiding this area and is happy to allow the Government to quietly destroy the NHS too ... through reforms no-one voted for and every professional body is against ... yet no-one is being listened to ... ethics, democracy, an independent BBC? I think not.

... and here is what I subsequently posted (post 11), which the BBC did reluctantly post!

Post 1 was referred for no good reason and has still not been reviewed/published! 

IMHO the BBC health blog is failing in its duty of care by not tackling the fundamental (and once in a lifetime) ethical issues/crisis which the NHS is facing at the moment (e.g. allowing GP's to profit from rationing healthcare - i.e. conflicts of interest), and Nick Robinson isn't either (preferring to focus only on Libya), despite the fundamental concerns raised by every professional medical body. Incompetence, dereliction of duty, conspiracy ... could be any or all of them.

The BBC appear not to want to upset their paymasters ... and this is not the licence fee payer - but the Government who decide how much (if anything) the licence fee payer has to pay! Independent ... I think not! They are just as bad as the politicians ... i.e. looking after themselves with no responsibility/duty of care.

I think these posts say it all really ... i.e. don't expect the BBC to feel they have a duty of care to the public (who they are supposed to serve - as we pay their salary), as they know the group who actually decide their fate is the Government  ... who agree the level of BBC licence fee and force people to pay ... but then most learned people in the blogosphere realise this already (nb the ex-director general of the BBC, Greg Dyke, Jeremy Paxman and Peter Sissons etc have all previously voiced their concern about this in the past).

Fact or Fiction ... ?

Here's one movie mainstream media are not going to air ... but the internet will ... truth or conspiracy theories .... you decide

It's a long movie (2:00:00) as it covers a number of areas, with Part 3 being the main one to watch (1:16:00), and for those without time to watch it through, but would like a few snippets, Part 3 of the movie presents a shotgun tour through the subjects of Central Banking, War Pretexts, Banking Panics, the Military Industrial Complex, Media Culture and ultimately the mental neurosis and deadly addiction known as “Power.” The central theme is how society is often misled when it comes to certain pivotal historical events, what those events serve in function, along with how the overall social conditioning patterns we see today function to create values and perspectives which support and perpetuate the static, established order/power structure, as opposed to fluid social change and productive evolution for the betterment of the society as a whole ... and it goes on to make the following points ...

"... the people in power do not want you to think too much ... that is why the country and the world has become proliferated with entertainment, mass media, television shows, amusement parks, drugs, alcohol and every kind of entertainment to keep the human mind entertained ... so you don't get in the way of 'important people' by doing too much 'thinking' ... you had better wake up and understand that there are people guiding your life and you don't even know it ..." (1:44:30-1:47:00)

"... the last thing the power establishment wants is a conscious, informed public capable of critical thinking, this is why a continuously fraudulent zeitgeist output via religion, the mass media and the educational system it is in their interest to keep you distracted in a niave bubble and they are doing a damn good job of it ..."  (1:47:00-1:50:00)

Peter Joseph, the Director of the film, concludes by stating that the most important singular statement of the film’s narration, which defines the purpose of "Zeitgeist: The Movie" itself, is: 

“The social manipulation of society through the generation of fear and division has completely inhibited the culture. Religion, patriotism, race, wealth, class and every other form of arbitrary separatist identification and thus conceit has served to create a controlled population utterly malleable in the hands of the few. Divide and conquer is the motto ... and as long as people continue to see themselves as separate from everything else they lend themselves to being completely en-slaved.” 

Climategate - The bursting of another bubble

Following my previous posts questioning the science (and politics) behind climate change, and the reasons for the BBC's lack of reporting (and biased reporting) ... it looks like this particular bubble is just about to burst ... with the Telegraph exposing what it has called "Climategate" ... which will be heard (and felt) by nations and economies all around the world ...

A fellow blogger recently wrote the following on one of Stephanie Flanders' blogs ....

"Not even a whiff of this world breaking story on any the BBC websites main story boards ... a week after the Telegraph coined the term "Climategate" to describe the scandal revealed by the leaked emails from the University of East Anglia's Climatic Research Unit, Google was showing that the word now appears across the internet more than nine million times ..." and referred to the links below:

1. Climate change: this is the worst scientific scandal of our generation

2. Climategate: University of East Anglia U-turn in climate change row

In response I replied:

"An excellent post and I couldn't agree more - take a look at my post a while ago pointing to this folly too ... and this one to see why the BBC report (and don't report) as they do ... all the evidence is now starting to spill out (thanks again to the Telegraph) ... and it's indeed a Climategate ...

As far as the economy is concerned IMHO this now means the 'next bubble' they planned to inflate has just burst in their face ... so now what are they going to do? ... hope? discredit? create more spin? or adopt some effective solutions to our problems ... I'm afraid with the 'shower' sitting within every mainstream political party, it could be any of the above, except for the latter!"

The BBC - part of the conspiracy preventing 21st century democracy

Following from my last post, and my previous points about the BBC failing in it's duties, Greg Dyke (former Director General of the BBC) has also today stepped forward to tell us the BBC is part of a "conspiracy" preventing the "radical changes" needed to UK democracy ... and he told a Lib Dem conference meeting he wanted a commission to look into the "whole political system".

But Greg Dyke also said 'I fear it will never happen because I fear the political class will stop it' and said 'major changes he had wanted to make to the BBC's coverage of politics had been blocked'.

He told the Liberal Vision fringe meeting about the expenses scandal and how it had changed voters' attitudes ... 'The evidence that our democracy is failing is overwhelming and yet those with the biggest interest in sustaining the current system - the Westminster village, the media and particularly the political parties - are the groups most in denial about what is really happening to our democracy ...'

Mr Dyke also said ... 'there had never been a greater separation between the 'political class' and the public. We want more influence over our lives and we are not just prepared to hand it over to this strange bunch of people who stand for Parliament ...

... I tried and failed to get the problem properly discussed when I was at the BBC and I was stopped, interestingly, by a combination of the politicos on the board of governors. Why? Because, collectively, they are all part of the problem. They are part of one Westminster conspiracy. They don't want anything to change. It's not in their interests ...'

He said ... 'the expenses scandal had been 'British democracy's Berlin Wall moment' but he feared the opportunity to change the system was fading away. He called for an end to pathetic jeering, shouting and childish behaviour and the pomp and ceremony in Parliament ...

... an independent commission should look at ideas such as moving the seat of democracy out of Westminster, a fully elected upper chamber with no whipping system, proportional representation, cutting the number of MPs by half, and reforming their pay and expenses, he added. It's time to be radical. Our current model was designed for the 18th Century. It doesn't fit 21st Century Britain' ...

And he added ... 'We want more influence over our lives and we are not just prepared to hand it over to this strange bunch of people who stand for Parliament because they have been knocking on people's doors for 10 years ..'

and went on to say ... 'A lot of the BBC governors were also what I call semi-politicians and they liked the present system and.... maybe they were right - it's not the job of the BBC to change the political system and to start questioning the political system ... I happen to not agree with that but, you know, we didn't get anywhere' ... and he added ... 'In the end political journalists live in the same narrow world as politicians do and they don't see a need to change because they think it's the world. They just don't understand that out there it's very different.'

Change - a challenge indeed ... however happen it will, and aided by the internet & 21st century technology, politics & power will eventually change forever ... and with Greg Dyke's comments today we are a little more wiser about the real BBC (and BBC journalists - particularly their 'political' journalists) and the role (or lack of a role) they are playing ... which, if nothing else, confirms what most of us in the blogosphere already know ...

Referred to on Robert Peston's 'What future for media and journalism?' blog.