NHS London board pushes ahead with "A Picture of Health" plans

I’m disappointed but not surprised that the board of NHS London (London’s strategic health authority) yesterday voted to push ahead with the proposals in “A Picture of Health” (APOH).

It is worth remembering that NHS London was amongst the more vocal critics of Andrew Lansley’s plans to halt the Dazi changes of which APOH formed a part. Indeed the then Chairman, Richard Sykes, resigned in May 2010 over the Andrew’s decision to halt planned hospital reorganisations in London, which included the closure of A&E and maternity units at QMH and the introduction of polyclinics.

I have long felt that the management at both South London NHS trust and a NHS London have been committed to implementing the APOH plans irrespective of wishes of local people and politicians.  I have long felt that the trust’s management didn’t use the fact that they had three hospitals under their control to redeploy staff and keep QMH running.

The ultimate decision on the future of QMH rests with the Secretary of State for Health who has had meetings with the local MPs and has visited the hospital recently.  The fact that the PRUH is currently turning patients away because of an outbreak of Norovirus shows how fragile the provision of services would be if the QMH were to permanently lose services.

8 responses to “NHS London board pushes ahead with "A Picture of Health" plans

  1. You seem to be trying to distance yourself from this debacle. If anyone were to search YouTube for Boris Johnson and Queen Mary's Hospital they would have seen you and Mr Johnson being quite vociferous about how it should keep its A&E. This was, er, pre-election. Post-election you let it shut anyway. Now you claim that either it's nothing to do with you, in which case you shouldn't have opened your mouth on the subject and, bizarrely, that it couldn't attract staff. Oh yes, and now there's only one person interested in it and they're just an 'obsessive'…

    We want to know what local Conservatives are going to do to open it again after you used it in your election campaign.

  2. Here, Here Obsessive,

    Got to agree with you. Mr C what are you going to do now. You and Mr B gave great election promises about saving the services of QMH. And now they have gone, indeed as promised Ilford have just replicated the shambles of QMH with St Georges Hospital.
    The services at QMH are only bad, because nothing has been done by local Politicians to improve the service. “

    Its like putting a lame donkey into the pasture to die, no one thought to call a vet in when he could have done something.”

    And yes you are distancing yourself from the subject. Its time to admit defeat and act like an adult. You lied, you tried, you failed and in the great spirit of British politics you blamed someone else.

    And obsessive is correct, check out youtubve and Boris and QMH, it makes for enlightening viewing.

  3. Copied over from the contract thread. For those also interested in QMH, Mr C is now suggesting that people commenting on the loss of A&E might not be constituents. This follows on from the accusation of people being 'obsessive' over this facility. He wants to deal by letter. My response:

    With the sort of behaviour you display, such as name calling and the dismissal of questioning as one 'obsessive' person, you are the last person on earth I'd want having my details.

    We vote anonymously, you provide a facility for anonymous questioning, I don't see the problem. If we write, this is what will happen:

    1. You will write back saying there's nothing you can do about it.
    2. You will ignore the fact that you used it as part of your election campaign.
    3. You will either recycle or make up ever more ludicrous excuses as to what happened because you are not able to admit the reality of the matter.
    4. Any further response to your inadequate response will be labelled as 'obsessive'.

    You seem to want to take part in the modern world when it suits you. We have the facility of social media that provides the transparency that you would ask from your opponents. So keep us informed of how you intend to carry through your pre-election campaign to save QMH A&E in public, not through private letters to one person that you can dismiss but in front of a wider audience.

  4. Copied over from the contract thread. For those may not have followed that, Mr C is now suggesting that people commenting on the loss of A&E might not be constituents. This follows on from the accusation of people being 'obsessive' over this facility. He wants to deal by letter. My response:

    With the sort of behaviour you display, such as name calling and the dismissal of questioning as one 'obsessive' person, you are the last person on earth I'd want to have my details. But I can assure you that I am a constituent – and a user of Queen Mary's.

    We vote anonymously, you provide a facility for anonymous questioning, I don't see the problem. If we write, this is what will happen:

    1. You will write back saying there's nothing you can do about it.
    2. You will ignore the fact that you used it as part of your election campaign.
    3. You will either recycle or make up ever more ludicrous excuses as to what happened because you are not able to admit the reality of the matter.
    4. Any further enquiry over your inadequate response will be labelled as 'obsessive'.

    You seem to want to take part in the modern world when it suits you. We have the facility of social media that provides the transparency that you would ask from your opponents. So keep us informed of how you intend to carry through your pre-election campaign to save QMH A&E in public, not through private letters to one person that you can dismiss but in front of a wider audience.

  5. Apologies for previous response going in twice. And for suggesting that you were deleting responses, it was some hours before they appeared.

    Still would like you to address QMH issues though.

  6. Sir

    Not being constituents aye?

    I am very angered by this type of allegation.

    I was born in Sidcup and have never left the Bexley area, unlike yourself I suspect Mr Cleverley.
    I have a huge vested interest in the down grading of services. As regards to us being obsessive, wouldnt you be or are you willing just happy to roll over and take it?

    This is not an issue that will go away. As far as I am concerned it is the only issue.

    Regards

    A Bexley resident

  7. Dear Anonymous, I can assure you that I have a significant suspicion of Mr Cleverly. I now understand that he did a similar thing with the Fire Service. I apologised because I accused him of removing posts, I don't think he did this now. But he will not address the issue of Queen Mary's A&E.
    When he seeks re-election this will be raised again. However, the area he represents is naturally Conservative so a broken wheelbarrow would be voted in if it were selected by the party. Anyway, I know a few Tories are upset by this debacle so who knows?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s