NHS Public Bills committee.

onebigvoice

  I would not normally promote another site here but this was sent to me by We own it.
I have included the link as well.  In a nut shell there is a Bill in Parliament that would allow people like Richard Branson to sit on the committee making decisions about the NHS and how its run, including securing comtracts? 
 We have seen how the Secretary of State has already used outside contracts to REASSESS claimants for benefits as long as they are APPROVED BY HIM?  The NHS is struggling to keep its head above water with all these private contractors supplying PPE that was not suitable for use yet what was said? NOTHING.  How many millions of Pounds have been miss spent by the NHS?  Branson took the NHS to court because he did not win a contract, this was settled out of court at an undisclosed sum...( Was in the Millions ) do you want this to continue?  many other Private company's supplying " things " to the NHS are not fit for purpose yet they continue.
Your chance to have a say:
  Thanks so much for emailing the Public Bills Committee and asking them to make sure patients get a seat on NHS decision-making bodies and that private companies are kept out.

Can you take a minute to spread the word? Share this link with family and friends: https://weownit.org.uk/get-private-companies-out-and-patients

THANK YOU for taking the time to write to the Public Bills Committee at this critical time.   
This is what I added.:
  Dear Public Bills Committee, The ability of any private company to make any suggestions as to the running of the NHS and procurment of Employees, medical supplies or sites being used by the NHS is ILLEGAL at this stage, since the people that use the services provided by the NHS are not being involved.  Since the NHS is being funded by the Natinal Insurance scheme that all British Subjects pay into, the heads of the NHS have a legal obligation that when running the NHS they get the best of the above for everyone, and that profits derived are put back into the NHS not the back pockets of Private companies that have found that they cannot forefill their contractual obligations months later because of " Low Quotes " to gain access to the contract on offer.  They would then renegotiate the contract terms which should have been revisited after 6 months anyway, but never is, and the poor or underachievement would have the contract resinded and the company not paid their rates of the contract.

woodbine

I could say many things about the above, but one thing I would question is the sentence "since the NHS is being funded by National insurance that all British subjects pay into" that clearly isn't the case as only working people do so, and those earning below the lower limit do not, and N.I has an upper limit as well.
So there are millions that do not.
I also think that involving outside experienced business people isn't the worst idea in the world, we have seen over the year sand more so recently the wasting of many millions of £'s in the NHS.

onebigvoice

Maybe I should have stated working class aged people, but I made the assumption that you knew what I was talking about.
  Yes I know about the upper and lower limits that is why it is fair.  Unlike Boris who is putting the cost of N I up to cover the costs incurred by the NHS recently, completely going against their manifeso promise?  Another broken promise which we have to foot the bill for?
  What reason should Richard Branson have on the bill and yet there is no one representing us?  don't we have a say in whether we wanted the latest 29 surgery's to go out to private contract or not?
  Am I not allowed to Support the NHS? seems not.
  

woodbine

@onebigvoice no one suggested you are not allowed to support the NHS, and although it has its faults I think overall its the best health service in the world. There are many MP's who are on NHS committees and you get a chance to elect them or not at least every 5 years.
But it does seem that the govt is about to abandon two major manifesto promises by 1) in creasing N.I. and 2)removing the triple lock

onebigvoice

Have you actualy read the link sent to me about ESA and PIP's all it talks about is how the costing for assessments have risen from £119 to £195 in 2016?  Yet when I quoted a figure of £395 in 2021 I was asked to show where I got those figures from?  Why is scope using a document from 2015/2016 when things have changed yet the DWP an PIP's also quote the 2018 Social Security ( personal Independence Payment ) Act which also covers ESA and UC, because the information you supply is used by every department.
quote from link:
  
  1.4 Although the three assessments are different, ESA, PIP and FFW overlap both 

in terms of the claimants they affect and the market for contracted-out assessments. 

The Department recognises these interactions and manages contracts within the 

same team. 

  In English the same evidence is used.

(Figure 4 on page 19). 

• Assessment report quality targets. The Department or providers audit the 

quality of assessment reports. ESA and PIP providers have not consistently met 

these targets (Figure 5 on pages 20 and 21). They only met 13% of targets for 

PIP and ESA assessment reports not meeting the contractual standard in the 

12 months up to August 2015. In September 2015, the Department’s internal audit 

team raised concerns about the quality of the FFW service although they did not 

look at this in detail.

Cher_Alumni

Hi @onebigvoice

I just wanted to check this was the intended thread for your last comment as it doesn't seem relevant to the discussion in hand?  If I'm mistaken, I apologise but it's best to clear any confusion.

onebigvoice

The relevance is in the bill now being presented to parliament where people who do not have the NHS at the forefront of what they do can to influence the system and even how contracts are handed out and yet there is no one that represents us?
  That link sent in another post from scope talked about the contracts and how they are being used and if any are they achieving targets set at the start of the contract and in 2015 only 13 % were satisfactory and that the price had increased ( so their reports say ) to £195 but this figure is incorrect as in 2015 When ATOS had to buy out of their contract because of the quality of their reports it was £395 per assessment. 
  My problem is not with assessments or the materials they use to assess anyone,  As I dealt with the Harrington reports back in 2012/13/14. where serious faults in the system were shown in the United Nations Forum, and at that time the P M stated that every body was picking on the government and when the Red Cross showed case after case of neglence and poor quality reports also supported in all the Professor Harrington reports, Mr Ian Duncan Smith resigned a week before he was to apear infront of the parliamentary commission as to answer questions about the assessment process.
  If you also remember he gave his position to Mr Green and also Mr Hunt all given the same oportunity to answer complaints against them and the assessment contracts and process, and as we know they all resigned before they were to appear.
  My arguement then and still is if you issued a contract to anyone then you have to enforce its content.  Just because you resign does not negate your responsibility's.  I had a list of 200 peope and climbing every day of people whi were given Zero for benefits and had benefits taken from them even though they were terminally ill, or had assessments completed by their surgeons and Doctors to score Zero From Maximus, ATOS and Capita.  And committed suiside, or were found dead where they could not affird the electric to keep insulin cool and with 30pence in his pocket and a tin of bake beans in the cupboard with 9 days till his next payment, but the letter showed he had been sanctioned, and no reason except that they needed to check his file notes.
  If you want the link for the deaths its called Calum's List, and was an Admin like me on another site who sadly died and he was called Nelson on that site all the dates and how they died are there some even gagged the coroners report about deaths being caused unsupported and scoring Zero sent to Mr Ian Smith and we were told that the reports we sent were lost and that he was retiring from his position because he could not continue inflicting what the DWP were doing to claimants.
  Read he letter sent to the P M then David Cameron who was also under the microscope and did the same thing.
  I hope this goes a bit of a way to understanding the frustration in spending hours getting these people to court to have them resign their position and the courts then state we no longer have a case?
  The crimes they committed are still a matter of record, yet never used to make these people accountable for their actions. 

Cher_Alumni

@onebigvoice Thank you for providing further explanation.  Unfortunately, I can't attest to having a full understanding (it's still early, I'm heavily pregnant and lack the relevant benefits knowledge!) therefore if you can find a link to:

  That link sent in another post from scope talked about the contracts and how they are being used and if any are they achieving targets set at the start of the contract and in 2015 only 13 % were satisfactory and that the price had increased ( so their reports say ) to £195 but this figure is incorrect as in 2015 When ATOS had to buy out of their contract because of the quality of their reports it was £395 per assessment. 

that would help provide further clarification at my end.

I think we can all empathise with your frustration at the sad passing of those who didn't receive the benefits and social support deserved while they were alive.  It's maddening, deeply unjust and demands a critical gaze.  One of my former lecturers China Mills produced this 'Dead people don't claim' paper that touches on the issue of suicides resulting from austerity in the UK.  It briefly covers the impact of benefit cuts and makes for a sobering read that you might find interesting, however for anyone particularly sensitive to this subject I would heed caution.

I hope you have a lovely day @onebigvoice - take care.

onebigvoice

mikehughescq - My point exactly. I have a letter written to me from the Department for Works and Pensions 24th January 2020. Re PIP Payment claim. it is 4 pages and is in response to an E Mail and Letter  received 6th January 2020, and within the bundle the signed decloration by me that they say they did not receive or the RECIRDED DELIVERY LETTERS WITH SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION.

  A previous post as to what we are paying for might better be explained here in their response to me.

This is verbatumand will add comments with bullet * points after each one.

DWP:  I have responded to the statements and questions raised.

A Disability Assessor ( carring out assessments for PIP benefit ) require a registration number in order to assess the claimant and write a report. 

How the assessment providers carry out assessments is governed by regulations and guidence;  The Social Security ( personal Independence Payment ) Regulations 2013.

All Health Professionals ( HP ) recruited for the delivery of PIP assessments ( or any parts of these ) must meet the follow requirements.

be an Occupational Therepist, Nurse, Physiothrepist, Paramedic, or Doctor.

be fully registered with the relevant licensing body ( Doctors must have a licence to practice )

have no sanctions attached to their registration unless they relate to disability, In the individual cases, this requirement may be waivered subject to prior written agreement with the DWP.

have at least 2 years post full registration experience ( this refers either UK registration or equivelent overseas registation for non-UK HP's ) or less than 2 years post full registration experience by individual, prior, written agreement with the department.

have passed a Disclosure and Barring Service ( DBS ) check.

               Before they are approved to carry out assessments, providers must be able to demonstrate,

                HP's;

have appropiate knowlege of the clinical aspects and likely functional effects of a wide range of health conditions and disabilities.

**  This is now already altering the 2013 Act as it does not state this, it states " Appropiate Register " **

have appropiate skills in assessing people with physical health conditions, including history taking, observation and ability to perform a relevant examination.

have the appropiate skills in assessing people affecting mental, interlectual and cognitive function, including history taking, observationand ability to perform a revelant examination.

are able to critically evaluate evidence and use logical reasoning to provide accurate evidence based advice.

have excellent interpersonal and written communication skills and that include the ability to;

interact sensatively and appropiately with particular regard for an individual's cultural background and issues specific to disabled people.

take a compherensive, appropiately focused and clear history.

accurately record observations, and formal clinical findings.

     produce succinct, accurate report in plain English, fully justifying conclusions from evidence gathered, and dealing appropiately with apparent conflicts of evidence and fluctuating conditions.

I can reproduce the whole letter but will show some other questions.

When asked about ID numbers and qualifications.

Therefore the HP will have aregistration number, but are not required to note their registration number and assessment on the report provided to the Department for Works and Pensions. ( DWP )

**  All charters by assessment companies state that when challanged with show a valid Picture ID which will contain their ID NUMBER.  which will be up to date on the day for the assessment.  **

Question.

As a registered Nurse ( the report ) should also contain their NMC Registration Number and should show her qualifications at the date of the assessment which should be up to date at the time of the assessment.  

As above, the HP ( I was now asking about a Nurse ) is not required to provide their ID number or qualifications.  These are to be kept up to date as the appropiate legislation provides.

**  And the legislation states that I am entitled to refuse entry into my home unless the appropiate picture I D and registration number is shown.  This again is shown in any charter used by the assessment company.  Including the statement it is not a medical examination but an assessment comparrison against descriptors for access to benefits.  **

  My point being and again where frustration sets in, is why quote the 2013 Act if you are going to interprate it any different than it is written.

This comming from a complaints resolution Manager, and within the next 5 months without warning and with an imminent Tribunal court hearing changed their minds 4 times issueing me with 4 different certificates of entitlement and not one letter as to how or why they arrived at their change in decision?

It must also be stated that 20 MONTHS later and they are still changing their mind?

  My case is with the Parliamentary Commission ( ICO ) and the Independent Case Examiners Office, ( ICE) and still with a Tribunal?

  

Cher_Alumni

Hi @onebigvoice

Just to let you know, I've merged your new post above with your existing thread as I believe it's a continuation of the same discussion.  Where possible, it's best to keep conversations in one space to give readers broader context.

Thank you.

MarkM88

I don’t see the relevance to your information posted. All HCPs will be registered with their professional body and qualifications checked, otherwise they couldn’t work. What you have wrote in my opinion is utter garbage. What’s the point you are trying to make? 

poppy123456

onebigvoice said:

**  This is now already altering the 2013 Act as it does not state this, it states " Appropiate Register " **

have appropiate skills in assessing people with physical health conditions, including history taking, observation and ability to perform a relevant examination.

have the appropiate skills in assessing people affecting mental, interlectual and cognitive function, including history taking, observationand ability to perform a revelant examination.

are able to critically evaluate evidence and use logical reasoning to provide accurate evidence based advice.

have excellent interpersonal and written communication skills and that include the ability to;

interact sensatively and appropiately with particular regard for an individual's cultural background and issues specific to disabled people.

Hasn't this already been discussed in a previous thread..... I didn't quote the who comment because it's too much.

MarkM88

It’s been discussed extensively. I can already guess what response they will get from the ICO and ICE. 

Cher_Alumni

On review this thread will remain closed as it revisiting a previous discussion around HCP registration status that ran its course.  

Both tone and content remain of importance to the community being a safe space, therefore in line with our community house rules please remember to:

• Be mindful of how tone and wording can be interpreted by others.
• Include links to reliable trustworthy sources to back up statements.  

For anyone unsure how to include a hyperlink, firstly select the text you wish to provide a link to, then click on the hyperlink icon which you can find immediately above the white box into which you are typing (see the screenshot below).


Then, paste the website address of your source into the white box where it says URL and press ok.

I hope that makes sense but if anyone struggles, please do let me or any of the team know so we can help.