Private firms invited to run South London Healthcare Trust services (From News Shopper)
Get involved: Send pictures, video, news and views - text NEWS SHOPPER to 80360 or email us
Private firms invited to run South London Healthcare Trust services
4:12pm Friday 24th August 2012 in News By Mark Chandler
Private firms invited to run South London Healthcare Trust services
PRIVATE health firms have been asked if they would like to take over South London Healthcare Trust's services, it has been revealed.
The trust, which runs Queen Elizabeth Hospital in Woolwich, Sidcup's Queen Mary's and the Pru in Farnborough, was put into administration in July after racking up massive debts.
Now administrator Matthew Kershaw has written to health providers including private, voluntary and NHS organisations to see if they are interested in running the trust's services.
He said in a letter to staff: "For any provider to be considered, they would have to meet a very high level of quality of care and financial value for money standards.
"This is not a signal that we have decided on future service models or who is best to provide them - rather it is a way of us assessing interest from providers in addition to SLHT itself who may be part of the future organisation of care locally.
"One of the options that will be considered is the re-establishment of the SLHT board but there are a range of others too including other NHS providers and the independent sector.
"If an option which included independent providers were to be adopted, it is important to remember that this already happens in the NHS and the crucial principle is that they are working for the NHS and its patients, who would continue to get free treatment according to need."
Belvedere councillor Cllr Gill MacDonald today criticised Mr Kershaw's invitation to the private sector, saying: "Local residents are already apprehensive about the future of health provision locally.
"This invitation to the private sector will only add to their fears. I'm very concerned that this, when coupled with the top down reorganisation of the NHS, is a further step toward privatisation."
A spokesman for Mr Kersaw's office said: "The Trust special administrator will make recommendations for changes to the way services are delivered, how, where and by whom. It is possible that there will be recommendations for organisational change as part of this.
"Whilst one solution will be to re-establish the South London Healthcare NHS Trust board, other organisational options must be considered.
"To support this, it is essential that the Trust Special Administrator is aware of potential interest from NHS, independent and third sector parties in providing or managing NHS services in south east London to help develop and deliver a sustainable solution for the people of south east London."
"This is not a signal that decisions have been taken about the future of services or organisational solutions rather it is an exercise to assess what interest there may be if new organisational forms are required."
The Unison union's head of health for the London region Chris Remington said: "We know the administrators have a legal duty to seek expressions of interest, but it would be a sad day for patients and staff if South London Healthcare Trust fell into private hands.
"Ironically it is in administration because it is drowning in a sea of Private Finance Initiative debt fuelled by the high cost of servicing repayments to private companies.
"The best option for local people is for the trust to stay together and be run by the NHS. The Government should step into to help trusts weighed down by the enormous PFI incurred trying to deliver new hospitals with up-to-date facilities for patients.
"If they can find the money to bail out the banks, money should be found to save this hospital falling into private hands. We know that private companies will be looking to make profits out of the hospital and that is bad news for patients and staff."
Comments(6)
Polly Staight
says...
6:18am Sat 25 Aug 12
Presumably this man is a paid up member of the Labour party which was responsible for the PFI... Ironically!
Apparently, because of a Welsh communist that made a really bad decision after some people made him an MP, it is now written in stone (like the ten commandments) that thou shalt not recognise that there are more ways to skin a cat, than something that dates back to soviet Russia.
Actually, in the early 1940's there was a cross party agreement that the NHS (which did not exist and did not have a name), was to be an insurance model, where the public paid into a fund and local providers would be paid to provide service... The idea was that all of the services that were available would be ready to give service in return for payment from the fund. Hitherto these providers would have been paid by the end user, the "parish" the local flag charities, the churches, the local councils... and yes some people (like many GP's) that were in business for themselves.
It all worked very well and contrary to the myth, nobody went without treatment.
The development of the welfare state had far more to do with the socialist concept of controlling the people than anything altruistic like improving the health of the nation, and so not only the money, but also the service itself had to be provided by the state.
As explained above; had its development followed the Beveridge agreement... what we would have now would be akin to the best state systems in the world, such as in France and Germany.
What we have instead in this case (and no doubt others), is three enormous, bankrupt regional hospitals, that cost poor people an arm and a leg (ha ha) to get to and utilise...
Think on this, if the regionalisation of the health system is followed to its logical conclusion (in this area since its inception the NHS has sold off 14 of the 17 hospitals that it took over in 1948), there would be one great big hospital in or near Leamington Spa... the dead centre of England.
As a certain Margaret Thatcher once said... Socialism is great until the socialists run out of other people's money...
...and as a certain Ronald Reagan said... the nine most terryfying words in the English language are... "I'm from the government and I'm here to help".
Polly Staight
says...
6:20am Sat 25 Aug 12
Even when France has a "right-wing" government (like Sarkozy), they are miles more socialist than us Brits... So I am not making an ideological point, unlike the union man above.
NorthernStar
says...
5:10pm Sun 26 Aug 12
goldenbroomboy
says...
3:16pm Mon 27 Aug 12
This article is nothing but a precis of the equally incorrect articles that appear in the national press. If the claimed author really is a local journalist, he should be ashamed of his ignorance. If he is copying from official press releases, he should be ashamed of his plagarism.
Polly Staight
says...
3:24pm Mon 27 Aug 12
Hear hear...
That phenomenon is apparent at national newspaper level too...
I believe it's called cut'n'paste jounalism.
The source of the story, usually a "spin" merchant feeds brain dead journo's who just sit at their desks with their mouths open.
mouthalmighty says...
11:09pm Fri 24 Aug 12