NHS: too little, too late? Hunt blames everyone …

“… The health secretary warned that the NHS would “fall down” without 150,000 EU citizens working in hospitals and communities across the country, saying he would use his conference speech on Tuesday to try to offer people reassurances.

Asked if the NHS was properly staffed – amid warnings of a crisis and the recent revelation that two junior doctors were left in charge of 436 patients at Derriford hospital in Plymouth – Hunt said it was not.

“No, we’ve got to do a lot better,” he said. ”Workforce planning has been woeful for a very, very long period of time.”

He said that health secretaries, including himself, had been too short-termist in their approach to the NHS, as he revealed his centrepiece announcement for a 25% increase in nurse training places from next year. Hunt said the rise was the biggest in the history of the NHS and there would also be more places available through the apprenticeship route. …

…Speaking about health, Hunt admitted that staffing was a significant issue as he reached out to EU citizens not to leave the UK.

“We want them to stay and we’re confident they will be able to stay with broadly the same rights as now,” he said, adding that the European workers were hugely valued and needed in an uncertain time. “We certainly can’t afford to lose them.”

He argued that more could be done on the issue of pay outside the basic salary, with plans to pilot a new app through which health workers could take on additional hours at short notice. Affordable homes built on NHS land would have to be first offered to health workers, he said.

… Admitting that the NHS was not properly staffed, amid warnings of serious strains, Hunt explained what he believed had been a key part of the problem.

“It has been a mistake made by successive health secretaries in all parties, that when you’re faced with a choice: do you put money into training more doctors and nurses [who] won’t come out of training in a nurse’s case for three or four years, or a doctor’s case six or seven years – or do you put the money into more cancer treatment today?

“Inevitably people take the decision to spend it on immediate priorities, even if it is not the right thing for the long term of the NHS.”
Hunt admitted that the party had to act on widespread concerns about public sector pay, many of which were raised during the election campaign, including by lifting the pay cap. But he admitted that could mean a challenge elsewhere for the NHS budget.

Hunt said properly resourced staffing was the priority for the health service but, asked where the money would come from, he said: “There is a big discussion to be had about that.”

He said the Tories’ biggest challenge was to take on Labour’s arguments, saying his party was ready to improve funding to the NHS and that services were improving despite challenging demographics.”

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/oct/02/back-theresa-may-or-risk-labour-government-hunt-warns-johnson

Actually, the choice was: do we put more money into training doctors and nurses or do we employ them from other countries and save on the cost – the money WASN’T put into better cancer care OR better social care – the money wasn’t there and never has been.

Conservative party severs links with all its university groups, tells you gsters to join with oldies

“The Conservatives are set to sever links with every Tory university group in the country in a bid to detoxify their brand.

A confidential internal Tory report seen by HuffPost UK calls for “risky student politics” to be moved completely out the party structures.

The recommendation comes after a series of embarrassing incidents involving student groups, including a member of the Cambridge University Conservative Association burning a £20 note in front of a homeless person and Tories at St Andrews setting fire to an effigy of Barack Obama.”…

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/tory-university-conservative-young_uk_59d2968de4b0f96298893b80

“May’s help-to-buy extension is another boon for housebuilders”

“Throwing another £10bn at the subsidy scheme will do nothing to improve the UK’s underlying housing problem

When former chancellor George Osborne launched his help to buy housing scheme in 2013, wise heads warned that, once a government starts subsidising mortgages, it will find it hard to stop.

So it is proving. Another £10bn is to be thrown at help to buy, the government has said in a supposedly crowd-pleasing announcement. This is a 50% increase on the sum already spent. City analysts calculate it will take until 2027 for all the money to be distributed. For as far as the eye can see, help to buy is here to stay.

On the evidence since 2013, the only guaranteed beneficiaries will be housebuilders. With a prop under house prices, their profit margins have returned to the 25% mark. Returns on capital are fatter in many cases. Yet this lovely cash hasn’t fuelled a golden era of housebuilding. Instead, the companies are returning their “surplus capital” to shareholders. Top executives, incentivised to do exactly that, are becoming richer than pre-crash bankers.

It isn’t even obvious that first-time buyers, as a group, have gained much. The ability to buy a new home with a 5% deposit is of questionable benefit if the price of the house has been artificially inflated and the government’s “interest free” portion of the mortgage doesn’t last forever.

Back in 2013, Osborne had excuse of sorts – he could plead that the banks were still in post-crash recovery mode. By contrast, the Bank of England these days frets about too much credit in the system, not too little. The situation cries out for imaginative policies to boost the supply of housing – especially regeneration projects. Another sugary serving of help to buy will do nothing to improve the underlying problem.

“We mustn’t let this scheme turn into a permanent scheme,” warned Lord King, governor of the Bank when help to buy was launched. His argument was that the policy was “a little too close for comfort to a general scheme to guarantee mortgages”. Too late now. Help to buy has acquired a life of its own and no politician dares to stand in its way.”

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/oct/02/may-help-to-buy-housebuilders-uk-housing-problem

The NHS: one doctor’s story

“An open letter to Prof Ted Baker, following his attack on the NHS
Dear Professor Baker,

It seems like only yesterday that another Professor – Stephen Hawking – felt compelled to raise concerns in the press about the current state of the NHS. If you recall, Hawking’s critique of Jeremy Hunt’s predilection for statistical cherry-picking prompted an extraordinary barrage of tweets from the Health Secretary, admonishing one of the world’s greatest scientists for his cluelessness on the matter of, well, scientific methodology.

Professor Baker, your interestingly-timed intervention today has prompted quite the barrage of headlines itself, hasn’t it? An NHS ‘unfit for the 21st century’, indeed? And that picture you paint of A&E departments’ disgraceful ‘unsafe practices’ – our ‘wholly unsatisfactory’ arrangements that ‘endanger patients, as well as denying them basic privacy and dignity’. It’s almost as if you think we’re somehow choosing to ‘keep piling patients into corridors where staff cannot even see them’ or to force patients to queue, hour upon hour, in ambulances outside log-jammed hospitals. Actually, you go further, don’t you? You directly blame us for the hellish conditions that patients and staff alike endured last winter, condemning our culture of ‘learned helplessness’ that leaves our patients abandoned, unmonitored, without even essentials like oxygen.

There’s just so much blame in your interview, isn’t there? Previous NHS staff, current NHS staff, ‘archaic’ NHS systems, bad managers, bad previous governments. Blimey. No-one, it seems, is immune from your blame. Except, that is, the one glaring exception. The one cherry you chose not to pick, so to speak.

Nowhere in your remarkable blame riff is there any mention of the funding climate in which frontline staff and managers alike are struggling – fighting tooth and nail, frankly – to keep on delivering a halfway decent standard of care for our patients. We are trying so unbelievably hard, Professor Baker. But we already have one of the lowest numbers of beds per capita of any country in Europe, as well as being one of the most under-doctored. And, of course, we have a government, currently, who has chosen to subject the NHS to the most draconian and sustained funding squeeze in NHS history. Right now, the NHS in my region is having to cut even more beds, hundreds of them. It simply cannot afford to do otherwise – like every acute Trust in the country. That’s not really going to help the patients stranded, bedless, in corridors about which you care so deeply, is it?

Of course NHS reform is needed. Of course we need greater community capacity and better integration between hospitals and primary care. But in omitting to mention the political context to your argument – the political choice to provide the NHS with inadequate resources safely to manage not only winter, but all-year-round rising demand – you come across, I’m afraid, as an oddly partisan chief inspector of hospitals. Why the omission, Professor Baker? Why blame the NHS and its dog, yet fall so shy and silent when it comes to acknowledging the political choices to underfund and understaff the NHS into a skeleton service in place of excellence?

Do you really think your admonishing letter to Trust CEOs, telling them to jolly well stop leaving patients in corridors, is going to do anything other than incense us all? Where else would you suggest we put them? Toilets? Broom cupboards? I believe Jeremy Hunt’s new toilet is rather lavish – perhaps we could squeeze one or two in there?

Anyone would think you were giving the Department of Health comms team a helping hand in the pre-emptive deflection of blame for the looming winter crisis away from the government and onto anyone else but Theresa and Jeremy. I thought nothing could surpass for sheer stupidity last week’s news that NHS staff were forced by NHS bosses to chant “we can do it” as an approach to managing ED winter pressures. But you, Professor Baker, have managed to out-Brent even that David Brent of a spectacle: instead of empty exhortation, you have apparently plumped for his more bullying style of management, through the medium of tetchy, head-masterly letters saying ‘you can and will pull your socks up – or else’. In all those years you’ve worked in the NHS since 1972, have you never noticed that nothing good ever comes from a caning?

Let me remind you what blame culture achieves, Professor Baker. First, it demoralises and undermines frontline staff. Then, it makes us feel hopeless and impotent. We stop trying to speak out, we become cowed and silent. And now, all that bullying and blame has managed to make the NHS less safe, not more, by allowing a culture to flourish in which no-one feels they can change anything, let alone risk speaking out for the sake of our patients.

In your interview, you’ve just achieved all of the above. I’m a hard-working NHS hospital doctor, and you’ve made me feel angry, demoralised, hopeless and incredulous – all in the same moment. That is not leadership, Professor Baker, and it is certainly not conducive to high standards of patient care. It serves only to present you to the public and NHS staff alike as a hospital chief inspector who seems to care more about playing a political game than the vital matter of patient safety.

How incredibly, bitterly disappointing.

Incidentally, please consider this letter my raising of safety concerns on behalf of NHS patients nationwide, as my duty of candour demands me to do.

Dr Rachel Clarke

Oxford”

An open letter to Prof Ted Baker, following his attack on the NHS

Gove, Brexit and pig’s ears!

“In a bizarre speech at the Tory party conference the Tory Environment Secretary and militant Brexiteer Michael Gove proved what an absolute pig’s ear the Tories are making of Brexit. …

… Scrabbling around for literally anything to put a positive spin on the ongoing Tory Brexit farce for his speech Michael Gove grasped at the unlikely subject of pigs’ ears.

Here’s what he actually said (remember that these are the actual words of an actual government minister as you read them):

“There are some cuts of the animal that are hugely popular with the British consumer, others a little less. But some of those cuts are hugely popular elsewhere, say, for example, pigs’ ears are a delicacy in China.” … “one of the reasons why [Britain] has not been as successful as we might have been at selling pigs’ ears to China is that EU rules dictate that pigs, like all livestock, have ear tags.”

He went on to say that because Brexit Britain could have its own traceability methods outside the EU without ear tags, “we can have pigs’ ears that don’t need to be pierced”.

That the idea that after well over a year of the Tories cobbling together their shambolic, ever-fluctuating Brexit plan, increased pigs’ ear sales to China is one of the best highlights of Brexit that a government minister and leading Brexiteer could imagine just goes to show what an absolute pigs’ ear they’re making of the whole thing. …

… Aside from the fact that Gove is clearly off his rocker to think that such a niche benefit to a niche market is remotely sufficient to counteract the chaos of Brexit, there’s also the fact that he didn’t even pick up on the fact that any journalist worth their salt would obviously use his mention of pigs’ ears to create a “Tories making a pig’s ear of Brexit” angle.

Before David Cameron appointed Gove to ideologically vandalise the state education sector by giving away thousands of publicly owned schools, for free, to unaccountable private sector pseudo-charities (many operated by major Tory party donors), he reportedly worked as a journalist.

That this former journalist didn’t even pick up on the damning “making a pig’s ear” angle before he started spouting such nonsense is a perfect illustration of the absolutely pathetic calibre of people Theresa May has surrounded herself to implement her anti-democratic hard-right vision of Brexit.

It’s not that Brexit is impossible (I’ve always maintained that under the right circumstances, and with a coherent plan of action it would have been worth consideration), but giving the green light to a bunch of staggeringly incompetent and ideologically deranged charlatans like Michael Gove, Boris Johnson, the disgraced Liam Fox and bumbling David Davis to simply make it all up as they go along was always going to end up with them making a total pig’s ear of the whole thing wasn’t it?.”

http://anotherangryvoice.blogspot.co.uk/2017/10/the-tories-are-making-pigs-ear-of-brexit.html

People who care for younger relatives and then have a child of their own penalised by benefit system

Saving the country millions in care costs means you can’t afford a child of your own.

“Carers who voluntarily look after younger relatives to stop them being taken into care are being denied thousands of pounds in welfare entitlements as a result of the two-child benefit cap, despite government promises to exempt them.

Campaigners have called on ministers to change rules whereby kinship carers who act as guardians for at least two children are refused child tax credits and maternity grants when they decide to have a child of their own.

Ministers promised kinship carers a year ago they would not be subject to the two-child policy after a defeat over the issue in the House of Lords. However, it has emerged that the exemption only applies to carers who have birth children first and then become guardian to a third child – not the other way around.

Although in such cases the third child is the carer’s first birth child, officials have blocked child tax credit payments worth £2,780 a year because the claimant is considered to have breached the two-child limit that came into force in April. … “

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2017/oct/01/kinship-carers-denied-thousands-of-pounds-over-two-child-cap

Money for schools is recycled money, not new money

“Thousands of headteachers across England are writing to parents to warn that there is “simply not enough money in the system” to fund schools properly, as their costs continue to rise and budgets come under severe pressure.

The letter from more than 4,000 heads will tell around a million families that the government’s new national funding formula still means their children face an unfair “postcode lottery”, with some schools able to afford class sizes of 20 but similar schools in other regions forced to have classes of 35 pupils.

The heads argue that the proposed national formula – designed to iron out historic disparities in funding – will do little to solve the funding crisis affecting many state schools.

“The finances of very low-funded schools are still insufficient to provide the service that your child needs,” the letter, due to be sent on Thursday to parents of children in 17 counties, will say.

“Parents and carers need to be clear that schools in very similar socioeconomic areas will continue to have entirely different levels of funding. This often amounts to hundreds of thousands of pounds in the primary sector and even millions of pounds across the secondary sector. Far from being resolved, your child’s education will still be at the behest of a postcode funding lottery.”

New funding formula for English schools is ‘recycling’, say heads
Calculations done by the heads found that – despite the promise by the education secretary, Justine Greening, of £1.3bn extra cash – the proposal amounts to a real-terms cut of 4.6% by 2020 compared with five years earlier. …”

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2017/sep/27/headteachers-tell-parents-you-are-still-in-a-postcode-lottery

Playing politics with peoples’ lives

“Labour has called for an inquiry after the collapse of a private ambulance firm that has contracts with the NHS and other private health organisations.

Private Ambulance Service, which the trade union Unison described as running an “abysmal” operation, was issued a winding-up notice by the Inland Revenue on Friday. The firm is expected to stop trading on 9 October.

The company has been employed in Bedfordshire and Hertfordshire as non-urgent patient transport service. It worked for hospitals including Watford General and Bedford hospital.

Labour MP Justin Madders, the shadow health minister, said: “It is still staggering that under the Tories so many parts of the NHS are being packaged up and sold off to companies who are unable to run the services properly.

“Several hundreds of staff and thousands of patients are now faced with huge uncertainty because of the failings of another private ambulance firm, and it’s not the first time this has happened.”

Madders called for an inquiry into what went wrong, saying the government should place “an immediate halt” on issuing other patient transport contracts until “lessons have been learned”. …”

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2017/oct/02/labour-calls-for-inquiry-after-private-ambulance-firm-folds

Companies make £44 billion profit, directors take £270m but don’t pay living wage

“Nearly half of our top 100 companies raked in a combined £44billion in profits last year while refusing to pay a proper living wage.

At the same time, the fat cat bosses of those firms pocketed nearly £270million between them, a Mirror probe found.

A third of FTSE 100 firms have now pledged to pay all staff, agency workers and contractors the “real” living wage.

The Living Wage Foundation sets this at £8.45 an hour or £9.75 in London – above the government’s National Living Wage of £7.50 for 25 and overs.

There are 33 FTSE 100 firms accredited with the LWF and the other two-thirds include a small number that pay all staff and contractors above the rates but have not signed-up to the scheme.” …

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/top-british-companies-help-themselves-11271770

Jeremy Hunt – drinking for US (that’s for the United States, not us the people)

Not at an NHS meeting, not at a social care meeting – special guest at a Boeing “drink tank”.

“Jeremy Hunt faced a torrent of criticism after it emerged he will be at a Boeing-sponsored “drink tank” while more than 4,000 UK jobs at rival firm Bombardier “hang by a thread”.

Theresa May has hinted that the UK Government could boycott Boeing after a trade dispute over aggressive tariffs broke out – a dispute which could ultimately see 4,500 workers at Bombardier’s Belfast factory made jobless. …”

Huffington Post UK
https://t.co/C3R5WiAPm5

“Let’s be clear …”

Andrew Marr show this morning:

Question to Prime Minister:
“Is the Foreign Secretary unsackable?”

Mrs May’s A:
“Lets be quite clear. What we have is a government determined to deliver a Brexit for everyone.”

Owl says: if BBC journalists cannot call out a politician for failing to answer a question – then perhaps they should be working at any job but interviewing!

Bring back Paxman!!!

(Well, at least she DIDN’T say “Brexit is Brexit”!)

“Boris Johnson ‘says Cabinet minister’s salary of £141,000 is not enough to live on’ “

“Boris Johnson has told friends his minister’s salary of £141,405 a year is not enough to live on, according to reports.

The Foreign Secretary told friends his annual earnings were insufficient because of his “extensive family responsibilities”, according to a report in The Sunday Times.

The Tory MP has four children with his second wife, Marina Wheeler. He also fathered a daughter during an affair with arts consultant Helen MacIntyre, failing to get an injunction to prevent the reporting of her existence. …”

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/boris-johnson-ministers-salary-not-enough-a7976641.html

MP getting £3,000 per month from a lobbying, that’s fine – isn’t it?

David Mitchell nails it in The Observer:

“The Tory politician James Duddridge pockets £3,300 a month from a lobbying company, but don’t worry. If it were a problem, it wouldn’t be legal.

What is the advantage of letting sitting MPs work for lobbying firms? What are the pluses of that, for the country? Because we do allow it, so I’m assuming there must be some upside.

After all, there are clear advantages to many things we don’t allow: smoking on petrol station forecourts, for example. Allowing that would mean, if you’re addicted to smoking, or enjoy smoking, or think smoking makes you look cool, you could do it while filling your car with petrol, polishing its bonnet, going to buy snacks, checking the tyres and so on. You wouldn’t be inconvenienced by either the discomfort of nicotine withdrawal or a hiatus in the image of nonchalant suavity that having a fag in your mouth invariably projects.

And the same goes for those essaying auras of Churchillian defiance and grit, or Hannibal from The A-Team-style twinkly maverick leadership, to which a lit cigar clamped between the teeth can be vital, particularly if you’ve got a weak chin.

Similarly, if you’re a pipe-smoking detective of the Sherlock Holmes mould and are, perhaps, investigating a crime on a petrol station forecourt, or merely passing across one while contemplating the intricacies of a non-forecourt-related mystery, you wouldn’t have to suffer a lapse in the heightened analytical brain function that you’ve found smoking a pipe crucial to attaining. Interrupting such processes to buy petrol may cause murderers to walk free.

And then there’s the possibility that allowing smoking at petrol stations will marginally increase overall consumption, and therefore sales, of tobacco products – all the Holmeses and Churchills and Bonds will be able to get a few more smokes in before they die of cancer – which would slightly improve trade and GDP, and so create jobs.

Maybe Duddridge just pops in once a month and is a master of clearing photocopier jams.

Nevertheless, I am not, on balance, in favour of allowing smoking on petrol station forecourts. The manifold advantages are, in my view, outweighed by the several disadvantages: passive smoking for non-smoking users of the forecourt, nicotine staining of the underside of the canopy, and various others I can’t currently bring to mind.

But you’d think, in a system that flattered itself as non-mad, as I believe the British one still does, practices that are legal would be bristling with more boons for the community than those that aren’t. That’s got to be the vague rule of thumb, right? So then, what are the good things about allowing sitting MPs to take paid work from lobbying firms? What are the upsides to that?

The downsides are as hard to miss as a few hundred thousand litres of subterranean petrol suddenly exploding. Let’s take an example from the news last week. It was reported that James Duddridge, a Tory MP who was minister for Africa from 2014 to 2016, is being paid £3,300 for eight hours work a month by a lobbying company called Brand Communications.

It’s one of the few lobbying companies not to have signed up to the industry’s code of conduct, which prohibits employing sitting MPs. You may say that makes it a nasty firm, but I don’t blame it. Why would it sign up to extra rules if it doesn’t have to? That’s like volunteering to observe a lower speed limit than the one prescribed by law.

The law is absolutely fine with Duddridge’s little earner. Former ministers’ jobs just have to be approved by the Advisory Committee on Business Appointments, itself described by the Commons Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee as a “toothless regulator” (these committees are so bitchy!), since it has no statutory powers of redress. Then again, as its rulings are almost invariably “That’s fine”, what powers does it really need?

Duddridge himself says it’s all legit because Brand Communications is “not a public affairs company”, but the company’s website says “James will bring his deep knowledge of Africa, experience of operating at the highest levels of government and extensive networks to Brand Communications”, which sounds a bit public affairsy to me.

But I don’t know: maybe it’s fine. We can’t know it’s definitely not fine. Admittedly, according to the Times, the head of one of Britain’s leading lobbying firms called it “an appalling example of bad practice”, and the chairman of the Association of Professional Political Consultants said, “MPs should not be lobbyists. It is wrong to be a lobbyist and make the law at the same time,” but maybe it’s still fine.

Maybe James just pops in once a month and is incredibly helpful in ways that don’t conflict with his public duties. Maybe he’s full of creative ideas, a huge boost to office morale and a master of clearing photocopier jams. And then he pops back to parliament and doesn’t think about Brand Communications until the next month, no matter what issues concerning their interests cross his desk as an MP and member of the Commons International Development Committee. Yes, maybe it’s fine.”

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/oct/01/lobbying-firms-mps-james-duddridge-brand-communications

EDDC’s strategy for dealing with budget deficit: bleed residents dry?

“There is a significant shortfall projected in 2020/21 (£1.412m) which is as a result of an assumed rebasing of business rate income thereby reducing our income by £1.2m. It is proposed in the Finance Plan that work is started now in bridging this gap and driving self- sufficiency of the Council. Members have indicated that the strategic theme within the Transformation Strategy “Maximise the value of our assets through commercial thinking with a focus on income generation, sustainability and developing local economies” is one they believe has significant potential. The Financial Plan considers how this might be progressed with the use of a Member Group (possibly the Budget Working Party) to consider business cases and suggests that a fund is created to unlock barriers to the Council progressing this aim. Detailed recommendations will be presented within the 2018/19 Budget approval process.”

Click to access 041017-cabinet-agenda-combined.pdf

page 60

Anti-abortion Rees-Mogg defends investment in abortion pill manufacturer

Summary: Rees-Mogg doesn’t mind at all if his investments are unethical and it’s ok to lie about what pills can be used for – the Vatican would find that ok.

“Multi-millionaire Tory Jacob Rees-Mogg has admitted his investment firm profits from abortion pills – even though he wants to deny rape victims the right to terminations.

His company has nearly £5million-worth of shares in the Indonesian firm Kalbe Farma, which produces the pills to prevent ulcers.

They also trigger terminations, can be bought in pharmacies and are used widely in Indonesia – where there are an estimated two million illegal abortions each year.

Father-of-six Mr Rees-Mogg defended the investments and said he would not resign his investment post.

But he admitted: “It would be wrong to pretend that I like it but the world is not always what you want it to be. …

The staunch Catholic, who is tipped to succeed PM Theresa May, is a partner in Somerset Capital Management, the investment firm he co-founded in 2007.

The North East Somerset MP, 48, is paid more than £14,500 a month for 30 hours of work for the company.

He will not reveal the dividend payments he receives for his 15 per cent share in the firm, based in London’s upmarket Belgravia.

But partners have trousered nearly £60million between them since 2010.

According to this year’s interim report, two of Somerset Capital Management’s investment funds hold £4.8million in shares in Jakarta-based Kalbe Farma.

The pharmaceutical firm make misoprostol, a generic abortion drug sold under the brand name Invitec. They also manufacture oral contraceptives.

Invitec is marketed under its other use as a gastric ulcer preventer because abortion, other than in cases of rape or to save a mother’s life, is illegal in Indonesia.

But the international women’s rights organisation Women on Waves say it is available in Indonesian pharmacies.

The Dutch-based organisation advises women in Indonesia on how to obtain the drug and the circumstances in which terminations are legal in the country.

It says: “Abortion is permitted to save a woman’s life, in cases of foetal impairment and in cases of rape. Spousal authorisation is required. Misoprostol is available in pharmacies under the names Chromalux, Citrosol, Cytostol, Gastrul, Invitec and Noprostol.”

Mr Rees-Mogg defended the investments.

He said: “Kalbe Farma obeys Indonesian law so it’s a legitimate investment and there’s no hypocrisy. The law in ­Indonesia would satisfy the Vatican.”

In an earlier phone call, Mr Rees-Mogg said he had been unaware the company made the drug.

But he added: “I don’t manage the funds and haven’t done so since I became an MP. But the funds have to be run in accordance with the requirements of the investors and not according to my religious beliefs.

“This is not something I would wish to invest in personally but you have a duty as an investment manager not to impose constraints on investors.”

Mr Rees-Mogg accepted he did profit “in a very roundabout way”.

He went on: “This company does not procure the abortion of babies. It’s not my money in these investments and I profit from the total amount of client money we hold, not the investments we make.”

The Eton and Oxford educated MP caused uproar this month when he was interviewed on ITV’s Good Morning Britain by Susanna Reid and denounced abortion as “morally ­indefensible” in all circumstances.

That, he said, included cases of pregnancy caused by rape or incest. He added: “Life is sacrosanct and begins at the point of conception.”

The MP said this was not government policy, but his own personal view based on Catholic teachings.

… Misoprostol can be prescribed to prevent stomach ulcers, or induce labour in pregnant women by causing contractions.

But when used with another drug, mifepristone, it ends pregnancy in NHS medical abortions to avoid surgical procedures.

Misoprostol is often used alone to bring about an abortion, particularly in countries where termination is illegal.”

Source: Daily Mirror
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/pro-life-tory-multi-millionaire-11267331

“Supreme Court to consider legal standard on adequacy of reasons in planning”

A rather technical article but basically the Supreme Court is to rule on how much information and how much detail y must be provided when an applicant wants to build in an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty:

http://localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk/index.php

“NHS ‘not fit for 21st Century’, says chief hospital inspector”

And not a word about austerity, cuts or underfunding!

“The NHS is not fit for the 21st Century, the new chief inspector of hospitals in England has said.

Professor Ted Baker, who started the role last month, said the system had not adapted to deal with the growth in the population.

In an interview with the Daily Telegraph, he said: “The model of care we have got is still the model we had in the 1960s and 70s.”

The Department of Health is yet to respond to his views.

Prof Baker succeeded Sir Mike Richards overseeing the hospital division of the Care Quality Commission (CQC), having been his deputy since 2014.
The former hospital medical director said the NHS had not modernised because of a historic lack of investment.

He said: “One of the things I regret is that 15 or 20 years ago, when we could see the change in the population, the NHS did not change its model of care.

“It should have done it then – there was a lot more money coming in but we didn’t spend it all on the right things. We didn’t spend it on transformation of the model of care.”

The number of pensioners has increased by a third in the last 30 years and he said the system had not been able to deal with the increase in the number of elderly people in particular.

He also criticised accident and emergency wards and has written to all hospital chief executives calling for action to improve safety.

Too many hospitals had “wholly unsatisfactory arrangements”, he said, such as letting ambulances queue up at the entrance or leaving patients in corridors.

The CQC is expected to highlight increasing pressures on hospitals, who are in danger running out of beds and staff, in a report next month on the state of the health and care services.

That was an issue that Prof Baker touched on in the interview, saying: “Capacity is being squeezed all the time. That is a real concern going forward – because there comes a point at which the capacity isn’t there”.

The BBC’s health editor Hugh Pym said Prof Baker’s comments come after predictions of a difficult winter for the service, with the chief executive of NHS England warning of the possibility of a serious flu outbreak.
NHS Providers, representing trusts, has said that without an emergency cash bailout the service faces the worst winter in recent history, our correspondent added.”

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-41451162

Privatised good, nationalised bad? Think again

The NHS has about 1,700,000 UK workers:

“In December 2016, NHS Improvement forecast that NHS trusts would end 2016/17 with a potential deficit of £750–£850 million.”

https://www.kingsfund.org.uk/projects/nhs-in-a-nutshell/trusts-deficit

COMPARE WITH:

Carrillion has about 48,500 UK workers:

“Shares in the beleaguered Carillion construction group, which is working on the HS2 London to Birmingham rail line and the vast Battersea Power Station project, plunged by 20% on Friday after the company issued its second profit warning in two months.

Carillion reported a first-half loss of £1.15bn and said its full-year performance would be worse than previously expected. It described the loss as “disappointing”. The shares, which were changing hands at 190p little more than three months ago, closed at 51p.

The company is struggling with a large debt pile and badly-performing contracts. It said it would write down £200m on 23 support services contracts, and was taking a £134m charge relating to its UK and Canadian construction businesses. …”

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/sep/29/hs2-contractor-carillion-profit-loss-construction-debt

CCG agrees deal with North Norfolk Council to save facility

“The North Norfolk Clinical Commissioning Group have voted in favour of the Norfolk County Council’s £2 million offer to turn the Cromer unit into a re-ablement centre.

This should give patients greater access to short-term care, meaning they can leave hospital earlier but still receive further support before returning home.

The vote also means that the CCG’s original proposal to remove two of the beds at Benjamin Court will not come to light. The proposal saw 16 beds at the Cromer unit being used for palliative care, IV, and Discharge to Assess beds.

Dr Anoop Dhesi, Chair of NHS North Norfolk CCG, said: “Our public consultation allowed us to listen to the thoughts and views of the public and we are very grateful to all those who responded and gave us such valuable insights.

“We are very pleased that a further idea was proposed by our colleagues at Norfolk County Council. Using the beds for re-ablement will still help reduce pressure on hospitals and dovetail with our Supported Care service.”

Bill Borrett, chairman of the Adult Social Services Committee at Norfolk County Council, said: “We care about people who have had a stay in hospital and we understand that most of them want to be able to return home and live independently for as long as possible. Our re-ablement services allow that to happen by helping those who need some extra support for a short period of time.

“Re-ablement services can mean shorter stays in hospital and less reliance on long-term care as people return home. We are looking to develop more of these services across the county and think that leasing Benjamin Court will improve our ability to support people in Norfolk.”

However due to the County Council taking over the building with their own staff, some redundancies may be made when the takeover takes place.

Lorrayne Barrett, Director of Integrated Care for Norfolk Health and Care NHS Trust (NCH&C), said; “While NCH&C are confident that this decision is the best way forward for the local community, reducing pressure on hospital beds, we are aware that this will have implications for our staff.

“This is a highly experienced, skilled and committed staff group and we are continuing to support and consult with them to provide clarity during this prolonged period of uncertainty, and we will work hard in partnership with them to retain them in the local health and social care services.”

http://www.edp24.co.uk/news/health/benjamin-court-s-18-beds-saved-thanks-to-north-norfolk-health-leaders-vote-1-5210438

“Free market” facts

“… May’s “greatest agent” – free-market economics – has established a system where:

eight people own as much wealth as half the planet

Such grotesque levels of inequality run through the UK, where

50% of the country owns just 8.7% of the wealth

While living standards continue to fall for most,

Britain’s richest 1,000 families are well on their way to tripling their wealth since the financial crisis. Since 2009, these families have increased their fortune by over 155%”

https://www.thecanary.co/uk/2017/09/28/pm-just-called-achievement-greatest-human-history-people-beside-tweets/