MP calls for community to run hospital if NHS plans 'don't work' (From Bucks Free Press)

I dislike the word 'community' intensely.

It seems to be one of the main buzz words of the current era.

It's the word that is dropped into any project to package it as a panacea, to 'get the sale'.

Some members of the 'public' could buy up the hospital and charge for the services to be provided there!

Sorry, I meant to start the above post with 'To translate...'

OK EVERYONE! I'M A MEMBER OF THE COMMUNITY AND I'M TAKING OVER NOW...

How does this work????

Whenever I read the word 'community' I think 'borg collective'....

'Community' is a 'London' or big city word that doesn't really mean anything.

Do we go in armed with brooms and mops?

So where wll the money come from for the so called community to run Wycombe hospital?

Well I was quite against this idea until a few minutes ago - my fiancee just rang me to say her handbag has been stolen again from Wycombe hospital today (she is a nurse).

So for the second time in 6 months we have to arrange a new car key, new front and back door keys, new driving licence, new mobile phone/SIM card etc - all because some tea leaf has decided they wanted something someone else had.

So why wasn't the bag in the locker? Because most are broken and the ones that work are always taken, so personal possessions are left in an unlocked room - the only place provided by the hospital for staff.

She wasn't the only victim today, nor last time. So again we face massive disruption and worry (address was in the handbag along with house keys).

Yes complaints were made after the last event. No, nothing has happened to improve the situation so guess what - it repeated. No surprises there.

So if they can't even achieve simple improvements for their own staff you can imagine how many changes will be made for the health services.

So yes - maybe let the community run it - by community that means sack all management and hire people with proven business skills and service delivery experience. Watch user satisfaction and service quality increase if it were to be run 'as a private company'.

Otherwise I'm not sure what is meant by community?

/off to write another strongly worded letter

Blaze Falconburger wrote:
Well I was quite against this idea until a few minutes ago - my fiancee just rang me to say her handbag has been stolen again from Wycombe hospital today (she is a nurse).

So for the second time in 6 months we have to arrange a new car key, new front and back door keys, new driving licence, new mobile phone/SIM card etc - all because some tea leaf has decided they wanted something someone else had.

So why wasn't the bag in the locker? Because most are broken and the ones that work are always taken, so personal possessions are left in an unlocked room - the only place provided by the hospital for staff.

She wasn't the only victim today, nor last time. So again we face massive disruption and worry (address was in the handbag along with house keys).

Yes complaints were made after the last event. No, nothing has happened to improve the situation so guess what - it repeated. No surprises there.

So if they can't even achieve simple improvements for their own staff you can imagine how many changes will be made for the health services.

So yes - maybe let the community run it - by community that means sack all management and hire people with proven business skills and service delivery experience. Watch user satisfaction and service quality increase if it were to be run 'as a private company'.

Otherwise I'm not sure what is meant by community?

/off to write another strongly worded letter

Yep cos we all know how well privatising cleaning and food and portering went in the 1980s.I believe we are still picking up the pieces from that mess.

As dreadful as this is for your fiancee, do not even think that being private would make it better.

Take it from personal experience - it doesn't.

Yes, let's get in people 'with proven business skills and service delivery experience'. Because running a hospital full of vulnerable sick people is the same as a supermarket or airline or used car showroom.

So what happens when they realise that treating some conditions doesn't pay? That income is based on an 'average' length of stay - if you are a bit sicker do you get turfed out? That treating patients sometimes means juggling decisions or doing what is best for them, which meay not be the same as what they want?

Gerry Robinson, one of the best businessmen of his era, concluded he couldn't make it better!

NicM wrote:
Yes, let's get in people 'with proven business skills and service delivery experience'. Because running a hospital full of vulnerable sick people is the same as a supermarket or airline or used car showroom.

So what happens when they realise that treating some conditions doesn't pay? That income is based on an 'average' length of stay - if you are a bit sicker do you get turfed out? That treating patients sometimes means juggling decisions or doing what is best for them, which meay not be the same as what they want?

Gerry Robinson, one of the best businessmen of his era, concluded he couldn't make it better!

And if you overstay your predicted Length of stay in the private sector the insurance company could refuse to pay out so you end up with a huge bill.
This is 100% true.

"Because running a hospital full of vulnerable sick people is the same as a supermarket or airline or used car showroom. "

Of course it isn't the same as selling products, but it is similar in essence to many other service delivery companies across a variety of industries - have a budget, provide a service. Not exactly the same, but private hospitals are already half way there - they function as a business; they have to to survive. The major difference is you don't have much choice if you don't receive the service you pay for with the NHS.


Of course I don't think privatisation of the NHS is a particularly great idea, I like the current method and think it offers great value for money. But think about this - take any successful company - they have to provide a service at a company level to the departments and employees, and then each department in turn provides their own service, wheter internal or external, no matter what the company does to make money. Any inefficiency and the whole thing stops working as it should. A good company would adjust to change things and make it work, not just carry on and become a bigger drain with a continuous budget.

I'm sure there is plenty of room for improvement and efficiency by improving accountability and decreasing waste - this is where real world business skills would benefit greatly - maximising efficiency within a budget. You should hear some of the stories my other half tells me regarding the bad management at various levels (departmental, hospital and trust) - in a private company this just would not be allowed to continue or otherwise the company would soon be out of business.

Blaze Falconburger wrote:
"Because running a hospital full of vulnerable sick people is the same as a supermarket or airline or used car showroom. "

Of course it isn't the same as selling products, but it is similar in essence to many other service delivery companies across a variety of industries - have a budget, provide a service. Not exactly the same, but private hospitals are already half way there - they function as a business; they have to to survive. The major difference is you don't have much choice if you don't receive the service you pay for with the NHS.


Of course I don't think privatisation of the NHS is a particularly great idea, I like the current method and think it offers great value for money. But think about this - take any successful company - they have to provide a service at a company level to the departments and employees, and then each department in turn provides their own service, wheter internal or external, no matter what the company does to make money. Any inefficiency and the whole thing stops working as it should. A good company would adjust to change things and make it work, not just carry on and become a bigger drain with a continuous budget.

I'm sure there is plenty of room for improvement and efficiency by improving accountability and decreasing waste - this is where real world business skills would benefit greatly - maximising efficiency within a budget. You should hear some of the stories my other half tells me regarding the bad management at various levels (departmental, hospital and trust) - in a private company this just would not be allowed to continue or otherwise the company would soon be out of business.

Perhaps you could then explain the abysmal failure of privatising food, cleaning and laundry then.
Because, believe me, it is a failure.
Private companies tender and Trusts go for the cheapest option. Has anyone not noticed that prior to the introduction of the internal market to the NHS in the 1980s we did not hear about patients starving, dirty hospitals and shoddy staff who spoke little English? This was because the hospital staff had the power to hire and fire and were not tied to a contract.
As for maximising efficiency - this is what our Trust is trying to do locally and my god they are getting it in the neck from locals.
Do you really think a private company would be any better?

If anything,they would be worse.

There is privatisation already in the NHS and it is NOT working.

Dear BFP Editor!
Before publishing some simple Yes/No poll perhaps you could put together all the facts etc. What does it actually mean?

Blaze Falconburger wrote:
"Because running a hospital full of vulnerable sick people is the same as a supermarket or airline or used car showroom. "

Of course it isn't the same as selling products, but it is similar in essence to many other service delivery companies across a variety of industries - have a budget, provide a service. Not exactly the same, but private hospitals are already half way there - they function as a business; they have to to survive. The major difference is you don't have much choice if you don't receive the service you pay for with the NHS.


Of course I don't think privatisation of the NHS is a particularly great idea, I like the current method and think it offers great value for money. But think about this - take any successful company - they have to provide a service at a company level to the departments and employees, and then each department in turn provides their own service, wheter internal or external, no matter what the company does to make money. Any inefficiency and the whole thing stops working as it should. A good company would adjust to change things and make it work, not just carry on and become a bigger drain with a continuous budget.

I'm sure there is plenty of room for improvement and efficiency by improving accountability and decreasing waste - this is where real world business skills would benefit greatly - maximising efficiency within a budget. You should hear some of the stories my other half tells me regarding the bad management at various levels (departmental, hospital and trust) - in a private company this just would not be allowed to continue or otherwise the company would soon be out of business.

Private hospitals can choose what services they provide and where. They choose not to provide intensive care, special care baby units, most obstetrics, most physiotherapy and rehabilitation, care for chronic conditions such as diabetes, unlimited cancer treatment etc. etc. These services are very expensive to provide, so not cost-effective in the private sector. The NHS hospitals have to provide these services as effectively as possible and god forbid that may mean travelling to Stoke Mandeville!

And in the private sector do you not think that the shop floor workers have a view on the efficiency of the management at all levels? The difference in the private sector is that you can walk in one day and find you don't have a job! Has your other half tried to let people know where they can see all these inefficiencies?