Dear Dr Johnson, Sent 30-07-19
It does not appear that I have had an acknowledgment of my e-mail below. In it you will read that I was to write to the Torbay 'Trust' to find the costs of the visits of Trust board members to the headquarters of Kaiser Permanente in the USA. I have not done that for lack of time, partly due to resolution of factors in my own health.
Another reason is Trust tardiness in grasping nettles -
a. Admiral Sir Richard Ibbotson
b. is the failure of board member Leslie Darke Executive Director of Estates and Commercial Development at TSDFT, to tell me in October 2018 whether staff leaving before retirement were asked in a kindly way their reasons for leaving. She was obliged. as you know, under the Freedom of Information Act to reply to my simple question within 20 days, and without a need for me to cite this STATUTE and her obligations under it. I asked her twice. The ICO (the overwhelmed Information Commissioners Office) was contacted and after delay, prised the following out of the Trust this month, at least 9 months after my question. See twin posting: Retention of Nursing Staff: Failure of Leslie Darke, Torbay Trust Board Member to Answer a Key Question asked October 2018
I am therefore asking you, on behalf of the CCG to answer these four questions given that the budget which CCG-Corporate Services holds of £1.6 billion funds the 'Torbay' Trust. That is, it commissions services, planning, policy etc within the Trust.
Data Protection and Freedom of Information Team
Request for information FS50815962[Ref. FS50815962]
Dear Ms Pearce, 12-07-19 11.45 am
This is a preliminary response. I first asked Mrs Leslie Darke, Executive Director of Estates and Commercial Development at TSDFT, in October 2018 whether staff leaving before retirement were asked in a kindly way their reasons for leaving. She was a board member. She was obliged under the Freedom of Information Act to reply to my simple question within 20 days, and without a need for me to cite this STATUTE and her obligations under it. I asked her again and received this -
21-12-18 Dear David, Thank you for your question. Via this e-mail I will ask my colleague the Director of Workforce to respond to your question. Happy Christmas to you too. Kind Regards Lesley
I heard nothing from the 'Director of Workforce'.
Dr Tim Burke BM Clinical Chair NEW Devon CCG 19th March 2018
Dear Dr Burke,
Thank you for arranging to meet me and my erstwhile colleague David Jameson-Evans. And I also thank you for the letter which followed with the clear minutes made by Clare Doble.
I accept your apologies contained in the letter. I have learned, much too late in the day and with some anger, that there was a worthwhile electoral process for all NEW CCG medical officers. This extract of the minutes adds clarity -
Dr Halpin therefore sought evidence that this was an electedprocess and wrote to the CCG onMarch 3rd 2017, but the documents that Dr Halpinreceived did not give reassurance on the process, detail or clarity as to how theclinically elected membership of the CCG had arisen. (collected correspondence)
In the absence of a coherent response to my question re constitution, and 5 months after I wrote to Dr Jenner of the NEW CCG , I instructed Mr Selman Ansari of Bindmans. He wrote to you on the 22nd August (4), that being over 5 monthssince my brief and courteous letter to Dr Jenner. You replied 25th October.
I will describe the manufactured changes in the service, note fragments of the chaos, the public mind and how we might turn the tide. There will be plenty of time for questions and for contributions from you. You know that OUR NHS is in the ICU and that many want it dead.
My background helps
Qualified 1964 St Mary's. Came to the old RD&E, just down Southernhay, in 1969. After 11 years of training I became a Consultant Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgeon at Torbay and the very good Princess Elizabeth Orthopaedic Hospital which the politicians bulldozed.
I have seen frequent and mostly harmful convulsions in the service arising from political dogma. Remind me to speak of a solution I have seen for 20 years. I have almost always spoken up; sadly that sets me apart from a large majority of doctors.
1988 was a good example. That most vicious leaderene was pushing for the 'Internal Market', a hospital dog eats hospital dog. Professor Enthoven, formerly of the Rand Corporation, had been flown over. I briefed myself and could see harm in at least 3 directions, but especially the cost of a swollen bureaucracy. All Torbay consultants turned up for a presentation by the unpleasant Regional General Manager, Ms Kathreen Hawkins. I stood and said – 'with the cost of administration now being 5%, is it not likely that it will double with these plans?'. '7% at the most'. I stood again and was told to SIT DOWN' by the surgeon chairman. That still hurts. No support from my fellows. The Internal Market, which was opposed by the BMA and colleges was rammed through. £1.3+ billion of administration costs were added to a budget of £30 billion – 5% to at least 10% in the first year. I was alone amongst the consultant staff at Torbay in fighting it. That set the pattern – of being alone in this most vital of things.
A letter to Admiral Sir Richard Ibbotson, dated April 13th 2017
Admiral Sir Richard Ibbotson KBE, CB, DSC, DLChairman of the Board of the Torbay and South Devon NHS Trust
Dear Sir Richard,
I write to you in your position as Commander of HMS Torbay! I assume you have ultimate responsibility for the actions, both good and bad, that take place under you. Thus I bring to you a very disturbing facet of the new plan for 'care at home'.
I am confident in writing to you because I was trained very well in all specialisms at St Mary's Hospital, qualifying in 1964. I then spent 11 years training in surgery, the last 5 being in orthopaedic and trauma surgery. I was appointed to serve in this role at Torbay in 1975. Although my 77th birthday is tomorrow, I have continued to take the closest interest in our medical services and in my fellow man, both here and in the world.
My central concern (among many) is contained in the annexe below - “prevention of hospital admissions”. This duty, as stated, is unethical. Furthermore, it places a burden on a person who has not been asked to provide evidence of any relevant qualification. Any conscientious GP would always consider whether admission to hospital was necessary and many would have the great benefit of observing/treating some patients in the local Community Hospital. So the only words which have an ethical basis is 'the Assistant Practitioner/Intermediate Practitioner will bring any concern about the patient to the GP.' He or she will consider the need for hospitalisation. (The title of this 'practitioner' is nebulous and should be clearly defined.)