Skip to main content

Sudden Cuts in PCT Budget Plans

The Government have suddenly announced that they intend reducing the planned budget for PCTs in Birmingham and Solihull by £18,931,000 in 2006/7, £28,395,000 in 2007/8 and £37,862,000.

This has been announced internally at the last minute and will result in a lengthening of waiting times for Medical Treatment in Birmingham.

I raised the issue calling for an extended debate on this as distinct to the issue of dental treatment at Business Questions today. There will be a health service debate next week at which I will try to raise these issues which are national issues that hit hard in Birmingham.


Liberal Neil said…
I'm sure Evan will happily brief you on the first class job the Oxfordshire NHS regime is doing to slash our budgets here John!
Bob Piper said…
John, you're a man of many figures. Could you tell me what £19million of the Birmingham & Solihull OCT budgets is as a percentage of their annual budget, and what percentage of their budget is represented by managerial and admin costs...then we will be in a better position to judge whether your statement about "a lengthening of waiting times for Medical Treatment in Birmingham" is fact and what are the usual Hemming scare stories. As you are well aware, waiting times under a Labour Government have been massively reduced since 1979, and they have put more money into the NHS than the Lib Dems even promised to do.

Popular posts from this blog

Statement re false allegations from Esther Baker

Statement by John Hemming
I am pleased that the Police have now made it clear that there has been a concerted effort to promote false criminal allegations against me and that the allegations had no substance whatsoever.
I would like to thank Emily Cox, my children, Ayaz Iqbal (my Solicitor), my local lib dem team and many others who supported me through this dreadful experience. There are many worse things that happen to people, but this was a really bad experience.
It is bad enough to have false allegations made about yourself to the police, but to have a concerted campaign involving your political opponents and many others in public creates an environment in which it is reasonable to be concerned about ill founded vigilante attacks on your family and yourself. Luckily there was a more substantial lobby to the contrary as well, which included many people who were themselves real survivors of abuse, which has helped.
I am normally someone who helps other people fight injustice. …

Statement re Police investigation into Harassment and Perverting the Course of Justice.

It was recently reported that the police were not investigating the allegations of Perverting the Course of Justice that I had made. This came as a surprise to me as I had been told for some time that my allegations were to be considered once the VRR had been rejected. I have now had a very constructive meeting with Staffordshire police on Friday 29th June 2018 and the misunderstandings have been resolved. At that meeting the evidence relating to the perversion of the course of justice and the harassment campaign against my family were discussed. The police have decided to investigate both the perversion of the course of justice and also the harassment campaign. I would like to thank them for changing their decision and I accept their apology for the way in which they did that. I am also in possession of written confirmation a police force would be investigating allegations that a vulnerable witness has been harassed for trying to expose the campaign against me. I hope that the aut…

R v SUSSEX JUSTICES ex p McCARTHY [1924] 1 KB 256

I have only just found this one which I think is accurately reported below (but if it is not please give me an accurate report).


R v SUSSEX JUSTICES ex p McCARTHY [1924] 1 KB 256

November 9 1923

Editor’s comments in bold.

Here, the magistrates’ clerk retired with the bench when they were considering a charge of dangerous driving. The clerk belonged to a firm of solicitors acting in civil proceedings for the other party to the accident. It was entirely irrelevant that there had been no evidence of actual influence brought to bear on the magistrates, and the conviction was duly quashed.

It is clear that the deputy clerk was a member of the firm of solicitors engaged in the conduct of proceedings for damages against the applicant in respect of the same collision as that which gave rise to the charge that the justices were considering. It is said, and, no doubt, truly, that when that gentleman retired in the usual way with the justices, taking with him the…