Saturday, 31 March 2007
Not just Crockard
This is the text of a letter sent to Sir Liam Donaldson; this, together with Crockard's resignation statement, tells us all we need to know:
Dear Professor Sir Liam Donaldson,
I recently resigned as medical student advisor to MMC.
Despite claims from the health minister that the new Foundation Programme has ‘widely been acknowledged as a success’ there are, and always have been, huge misgivings about it at student, junior doctor and all other levels. I hoped that access to the MMC team would give me an opportunity to make these views heard. I was wrong. Although you continually tell us that you are ‘working with the profession’ you are not, at any level, listening to it. This is why I resigned: please find enclosed my letter of resignation to Professor Alan Crockard.
From a grassroots level upwards, your recruitment of those from the profession has been tokenistic at best. My role was little more than a publicity stunt. You want to be seen to be involving us but care little for the reality of what we actually have to say.
Even at the highest levels you have been seen to charge professionals with responsibility but withhold authority.
It is not my job to outline the infinite professional, personal and philosophical problems that blight your new systems – the 12,000 junior doctors who recently marched through London could do this more eloquently than I could ever hope to – but it is my job to expose the growing chasm between yourself and the profession.
Your agenda does not meet with the approval of the profession. You must acknowledge this. It is not acceptable for you to enlist members of the profession from all levels and to then ignore them. It is not acceptable to use your implementation team – MMC – as a vehicle for spin, as a way to convince the profession that things are other than they are. It is not acceptable for you to hide behind the responsibility you have dispensed to MMC and at the same time maintain your authority so you can push through your own agenda.
And yet, this is what you are doing. No matter what the profession says, no matter how vociferously it protests, no matter what damage is done to families up and down the country, this is what you will continue to do. How kind of Lord Hunt – at a time when faith in your systems is at its nadir - to illustrate the DoH’s utter contempt for the profession, by saying “I would like to reconfirm our commitment to MMC which aims to recruit and train the best doctors to provide the best possible patient care.”
This is your project. Everyone else – from MMC to MTAS, from the royal colleges to PMETB, from the advisors to the spin doctors – are merely your implementation tools. Ultimate authority rests with you. It is now time for you to take responsibility. If you continue to force through these reforms, I want you to know that it is obvious - even from a medical student level - that you are a million miles away from being the ‘bridge between the profession and the government’ that you claim: you could not be acting more undemocratically if you tried.
If you find this image unappealing, your options are clear: take heed of the groundswell against you and your agenda and cede your authority back to the profession. If this is also unpalatable to you, then you must resign.
Yours Sincerely,
Alex Liakos
Dear Professor Sir Liam Donaldson,
I recently resigned as medical student advisor to MMC.
Despite claims from the health minister that the new Foundation Programme has ‘widely been acknowledged as a success’ there are, and always have been, huge misgivings about it at student, junior doctor and all other levels. I hoped that access to the MMC team would give me an opportunity to make these views heard. I was wrong. Although you continually tell us that you are ‘working with the profession’ you are not, at any level, listening to it. This is why I resigned: please find enclosed my letter of resignation to Professor Alan Crockard.
From a grassroots level upwards, your recruitment of those from the profession has been tokenistic at best. My role was little more than a publicity stunt. You want to be seen to be involving us but care little for the reality of what we actually have to say.
Even at the highest levels you have been seen to charge professionals with responsibility but withhold authority.
It is not my job to outline the infinite professional, personal and philosophical problems that blight your new systems – the 12,000 junior doctors who recently marched through London could do this more eloquently than I could ever hope to – but it is my job to expose the growing chasm between yourself and the profession.
Your agenda does not meet with the approval of the profession. You must acknowledge this. It is not acceptable for you to enlist members of the profession from all levels and to then ignore them. It is not acceptable to use your implementation team – MMC – as a vehicle for spin, as a way to convince the profession that things are other than they are. It is not acceptable for you to hide behind the responsibility you have dispensed to MMC and at the same time maintain your authority so you can push through your own agenda.
And yet, this is what you are doing. No matter what the profession says, no matter how vociferously it protests, no matter what damage is done to families up and down the country, this is what you will continue to do. How kind of Lord Hunt – at a time when faith in your systems is at its nadir - to illustrate the DoH’s utter contempt for the profession, by saying “I would like to reconfirm our commitment to MMC which aims to recruit and train the best doctors to provide the best possible patient care.”
This is your project. Everyone else – from MMC to MTAS, from the royal colleges to PMETB, from the advisors to the spin doctors – are merely your implementation tools. Ultimate authority rests with you. It is now time for you to take responsibility. If you continue to force through these reforms, I want you to know that it is obvious - even from a medical student level - that you are a million miles away from being the ‘bridge between the profession and the government’ that you claim: you could not be acting more undemocratically if you tried.
If you find this image unappealing, your options are clear: take heed of the groundswell against you and your agenda and cede your authority back to the profession. If this is also unpalatable to you, then you must resign.
Yours Sincerely,
Alex Liakos
Thursday, 29 March 2007
Hot off the press
Professor Alan Crockard was the architect of the government's flagship and disasterous MMC programme which has thrown the careers of a whole generation of junior doctors into chaos. Earlier today a letter was sent to the GMC reporting Professor Crockard for alleged serious professional misconduct; now Crockard has resigned.
Full story to follow.
Full story to follow.
How to waste £6.5million
The government waste's so much money that it's hard to get too fussed about the odd £6.5million per year; but don't forget it's not their money it's our money.
Yesterday MPs voted themselves an extra £10,000 per annum (each) as "communications allowance". This is on top of the £150,000 a year they are already allowed in expenses (and much of it not requiring a receipt).
Why do they need it? They can appear on local radio (free) when ever they want to, they can write to the local newspapers (pretty well certain to have their letter published) , and they can set up a web site such as this. They already get unlimited free postage and stationery, and free usage of the telephone. So what on earth do they need another £6.5 million for?
This is a pre-election promise: when I am elected I will not be claiming this money.
Yesterday MPs voted themselves an extra £10,000 per annum (each) as "communications allowance". This is on top of the £150,000 a year they are already allowed in expenses (and much of it not requiring a receipt).
Why do they need it? They can appear on local radio (free) when ever they want to, they can write to the local newspapers (pretty well certain to have their letter published) , and they can set up a web site such as this. They already get unlimited free postage and stationery, and free usage of the telephone. So what on earth do they need another £6.5 million for?
This is a pre-election promise: when I am elected I will not be claiming this money.
Saturday, 24 March 2007
Education,education,education
This is the text of an e-mail that I sent to the Chief Executive (copied to the Chairman) of the East of England SHA on 10th March 2007. The fact that I have not had a reply speaks for itself.
Dear Mr McKay
I was idly studying the website of the East of England SHA (www.eoe.nhs.uk) and looking at the papers for the board meeting to be held on Thursday 15th March 2007.
One of the items relates to next year's (2007/8) budget for postgraduate medical education and training. The SHA is the regional budget holder for this money. The alocation from the department of health for next year is £332.8million; this sounds a lot but it covers the salaries of junior staff as well as education and training, postgrad centres etc.
The SHA then cheerful announces that it intends to remove £34.6million from this ring fenced money "to the SHA strategic reserves to support the EoE financial position"
This seems a disgraceful subversion of funds properly intended for the vital functions of education and training, and I would value your comments
Kind regards
Dr Barry Monk
Dear Mr McKay
I was idly studying the website of the East of England SHA (www.eoe.nhs.uk) and looking at the papers for the board meeting to be held on Thursday 15th March 2007.
One of the items relates to next year's (2007/8) budget for postgraduate medical education and training. The SHA is the regional budget holder for this money. The alocation from the department of health for next year is £332.8million; this sounds a lot but it covers the salaries of junior staff as well as education and training, postgrad centres etc.
The SHA then cheerful announces that it intends to remove £34.6million from this ring fenced money "to the SHA strategic reserves to support the EoE financial position"
This seems a disgraceful subversion of funds properly intended for the vital functions of education and training, and I would value your comments
Kind regards
Dr Barry Monk
Thursday, 22 March 2007
A horror story
The present meltdown in the NHS pales into insignificance by comparison with events in Iraq
There is a graphic account on the BBC website of the breakdown in medical care there:
There is a graphic account on the BBC website of the breakdown in medical care there:
For the people of Iraq, it may be the ultimate nightmare.
The ordeal continues for victims of Iraq's violence when they are taken to hospital. 
Iraq's remaining doctors face a lack of basic medical equipment
Most of the best medical staff have left after being targeted by insurgents. Many have fled the country just in the last few months.
Drugs and equipment are almost non-existent. The notorious militias target patients inside hospitals, and doctors inside the health ministry.
All this in a country that used to pride itself on the best medical services in the Middle East.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)