Skip to main content

Unions concerned about lack of debate in Parliament

From the link:

Profound changes are taking place in the NHS with no debate in Parliament and without full and proper consultation with major stakeholders such as staff and their representative organisations, community and user groups. These profound changes have significant consequences for the future of the NHS and the patient experience.

The OJEC tender is very significant. I have tried to get this debated in parliament, but without any success so far.

In essence the OJEC tender allows anything paid for by a PCT to be done by a private sector organisation. That basically involves about 90% of the spend of the NHS.

Comments

Bob Piper said…
Whew! I thought for a bit you were going to repeat your fantasy about 11,000 NHS redundancies. Whatever did happen to that piece of Hemming scaremongering, I wonder? The last time I asked you the question (April... ) you said ... "there's no need for me to even answer where these redundancies are going to be."

I suppose you've dropped that line as quickly as your income tax rises to pay for the NHS have you?
john said…
Don't talk to Student Nurses if you want to pretend that there are no issues with jobs.

The job cuts do not necessarily involve redundancies.
Bob Piper said…
I'm not pretending anything. You announced job losses as an NHS crisis. Do you consider not filling vacant posts constitutes 'job losses'? If so, can you confirm that there are no posts being held vacant in Birmingham City Council? Or do you count those 'vacancies' as job losses? Glass houses and stones come to mind.

The fact is Labour spending on the NHS, and job creation for nurses and doctors, far outstrips even the wild 'figures snatched out of the air' in the Liberal Democrat General Election manifestos since 1979.
john said…
Deleting vacant posts is a job loss yes.
Bob Piper said…
Holding posts vacant and not filling them is also a job loss. Can you confirm that Birmingham City Council is currently not holding any posts vacant that they are not attempting to fill? Can you confirm that Birmingham City Council has not deleted posts in the last two years? Of course you can't. Nor can any other major employer... including the NHS.

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).

KING’S BENCH DIVISION

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.

LORD HEWART CJ:
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…