Health boss says public will not derail hospital plan (From Bucks Free Press)

So all the BS about wanting our opinions was a tissue of lies. They are going to do exactly what they want.
.
Public meetings are just to imform the public of what the unelected, overpaid, egocentric health politburo have decided.
.
The health service is NOT a private company.
.
Can we allow public servants, like Stewart George, to become dictators?
.
There is a lot of self interest in the higher echelons of our local health service, where there seems to be more emphasis on achieving targets and making bonuses that anything "clinically lead".

There is no way they would risk loosing their bonuses due to this being stopped!!!

Sheer pig-headed arrogance

You see of course the public, who pay their wages, have no say in the matter. Despite them being employed by us to provide a service to us, they despise us.

J B Blackett wrote:
Sheer pig-headed arrogance

Quite so. Whether the decision is right or wrong, this character is unbelievably arrogant and should be sacked forthwith - and without his pension.

So for those commenting above the conclusion is unvariable; for speaking honestly and in a forthright manner Stewart George is to be castigated, fired and to have any Pension Rights which he might have withdrawn.
-
Furthermore it is to be accepted as fact that his sole motivations are greed which will be satisfied by his being able to access the bonus which he will be paid as a result of implementing a plan of action which has been predetermined prior to public consultation - despite the absense of any any indication that proof that such a bonus being on offer exists and the fact that it has been demonstrated that earlier input from public consultation has been incorporated in these latest proposals!
-
When it is obviously the case that the vast majority of the above commentators have closed their minds to the possibility that the proposed changes might be of benefit to the health services being received by the people of Bucks how can they possibly justify comments stating that the minds of NHS Managers are closed to any input from the public?
-
George is very specific in stating that any input, supported by evidence, will be heard and will be acted upon.
-
I find it very difficult to believe that anyone would want the NHS to respond to 'the loudest voices' where what is being shouted by these loudmouths is unsupported by anything other that an implied statement that these individuals will challenge any change irrespective of what justifications for implementing these proposed changes are offered. They are quite prepared to indulge in 'ad hominem' attacks upon anyone within the NHS associated with these proposals and upon any member of the public who might appear to be supportive of these proposals - even if these members of the public have some reservations or proposals for amendments to these proposals.
-
Enjoy and partake in these public consultations but, please, do not approach them with unmitigated bias, bigotry and negativity.

Joe Ordinary wrote:
So for those commenting above the conclusion is unvariable; for speaking honestly and in a forthright manner Stewart George is to be castigated, fired and to have any Pension Rights which he might have withdrawn. - Furthermore it is to be accepted as fact that his sole motivations are greed which will be satisfied by his being able to access the bonus which he will be paid as a result of implementing a plan of action which has been predetermined prior to public consultation - despite the absense of any any indication that proof that such a bonus being on offer exists and the fact that it has been demonstrated that earlier input from public consultation has been incorporated in these latest proposals! - When it is obviously the case that the vast majority of the above commentators have closed their minds to the possibility that the proposed changes might be of benefit to the health services being received by the people of Bucks how can they possibly justify comments stating that the minds of NHS Managers are closed to any input from the public? - George is very specific in stating that any input, supported by evidence, will be heard and will be acted upon. - I find it very difficult to believe that anyone would want the NHS to respond to 'the loudest voices' where what is being shouted by these loudmouths is unsupported by anything other that an implied statement that these individuals will challenge any change irrespective of what justifications for implementing these proposed changes are offered. They are quite prepared to indulge in 'ad hominem' attacks upon anyone within the NHS associated with these proposals and upon any member of the public who might appear to be supportive of these proposals - even if these members of the public have some reservations or proposals for amendments to these proposals. - Enjoy and partake in these public consultations but, please, do not approach them with unmitigated bias, bigotry and negativity.

"Don't fix something that isn't broken".

The world/country would be a much better place.

J.O. I object to your tone. My comment was solely about the arrogance of the representative of the Trust, nothing to do with the merits or otherwise of the actions. I am not well enough informed on clinical matters to pass judgement on the moves, but a public servant who displays such breath-taking arrogance (reportedly) is unacceptable.

Joe Ordinary wrote:
So for those commenting above the conclusion is unvariable; for speaking honestly and in a forthright manner Stewart George is to be castigated, fired and to have any Pension Rights which he might have withdrawn. - Furthermore it is to be accepted as fact that his sole motivations are greed which will be satisfied by his being able to access the bonus which he will be paid as a result of implementing a plan of action which has been predetermined prior to public consultation - despite the absense of any any indication that proof that such a bonus being on offer exists and the fact that it has been demonstrated that earlier input from public consultation has been incorporated in these latest proposals! - When it is obviously the case that the vast majority of the above commentators have closed their minds to the possibility that the proposed changes might be of benefit to the health services being received by the people of Bucks how can they possibly justify comments stating that the minds of NHS Managers are closed to any input from the public? - George is very specific in stating that any input, supported by evidence, will be heard and will be acted upon. - I find it very difficult to believe that anyone would want the NHS to respond to 'the loudest voices' where what is being shouted by these loudmouths is unsupported by anything other that an implied statement that these individuals will challenge any change irrespective of what justifications for implementing these proposed changes are offered. They are quite prepared to indulge in 'ad hominem' attacks upon anyone within the NHS associated with these proposals and upon any member of the public who might appear to be supportive of these proposals - even if these members of the public have some reservations or proposals for amendments to these proposals. - Enjoy and partake in these public consultations but, please, do not approach them with unmitigated bias, bigotry and negativity.

Obviously you have something to do with the NHS, sorry but these kind of people are only in it for the money, and how much they can fit in their wallet at the end of the day, so i wouldn't go round preaching that these people have solely got the NHS first, and there is no benefit to themselves.
Long before people started fiddling, the NHS was profitable, and ran like clockwork.

I have attended the recent consultation meeting in High Wycombe and listened to the arguments for and against the proposed changes I am now happy that the changes are clinically-led (not all financial as the highly biased and skewed articles in the BFP imply). The idea is that we as patients get a better service & medical outcome. As a tax payer I want good health care but it has to be affordable.
I was embarrassed by the often rude, loud and repeatedly irrelevant questions at the meeting on Tuesday 28 February (often personal questions about their individual medical cases and not about the proposed options) made by certain members of the audience to the presenters.

It became clear to me that some people just do not want any changes in the NHS especially when the hospital at High Wycombe is involved. But we must have change for many reasons. We need to stop looking back at the past because medicine has a huge rate of change that keeps more of us alive, for longer. We must adapt to change.
The proposals are not privatisation or the Conservatives reducing the NHS. Nor is it closure of our hospital in High Wycombe. We must stop the rumours and scaremongering. People needed to read the reports on the consultation website with open minds and be realistic what can be achieved. There are no hospitals anywhere in England that have all the specialist facilities we would all like! No county or country could possible afford all the specialist facilities we would all like and the clinicians would not be practiced enough or even attracted to work in their specialisation if their skills were not kept current.
Therefore we need to be practical and work within the art of the possible. After all, with only 3% of High Wycombe patients have to go to Stoke Mandeville and work being undertaken about the transport difficulties means the proposals are a reasonable arrangement and best for us all.
Not perfect, I admit, but the best compromise we can expect to ensure we as patients get a better service and medical outcome. Surely if 3% have to go 15 miles it is not too much to ask so we get the best quality medical care in Buckinghamshire? I want the best chances of getting well; therefore I reluctantly but realistically support the proposed changes.

The presumption that clinical excellence should be given priority is flawed. There are countless instances where regular visits by family and friends have a marked benefit on recovery times and is of
benefit not just the patient, but also family members who may wish to talk to, or say goodby to loved ones. This is obviously impractical for Wycombe based families who will be unable to visit patients, eg in their lunch hour etc