Jump to content

IOM DHSC & MANX CARE


Cassie2
 Share

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, buncha wankas said:

Hooper is like a “Rabbit in the headlights” just sitting staring.   He is not a leader, like Beacroft he is all mouth no action

Less mouth to go with no action once he got a ministerial position. 
He needs to step aside and let someone who isn’t afraid of senior civil managers step in. 

Well as already pointed out, Beecroft (as was) tried to change things from the top and got sacked by Greenhow for trying (while Quayle who didn't have the guts to do it himself, sulked in the corner and tried to make it better with a bunch of flowers).  But of course Hooper has even less power than she theoretically had, he's only directly in control of the 40 or so civil servants in DHSC who seem to have absolutely no purpose at all[1].

The truth is the DHSC/Manx Care split was a wholly unnecessary and expensive folly, like much else produced by the Quayle administration.  Rather than try to tackle the problems themselves they hoped someone else would do it for them and they would be free from those nagging constituents trying to get them to fix things.

 

[1]  They're supposed to be monitoring and setting policy, but Manx Care also has policy people as well and the CQC have (rightly) been brought in to the monitoring.  You get the impression that a large proportion of the better paid parts of the civil service are basically courtiers, there to make the Ministers and each other feel important.

  • Thanks 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Manx Resident said:

Really, Mr Ashford MHK is being critical of the organisation for which he had responsibility!. Do our politicians think they are actually in an episode of “Yes Minister” and everything they say and do is only for comedic effect.

Having listened to the clip on the website, I don’t understand why a minister of such insight - and drive to makes changes - was ever allowed to leave the post!

  • Haha 9
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Two-lane said:

Do you mean that Couch complained to Quayle, and Quayle sacked her?

No, Couch complained to Greenhow and Greenhow sacked her.  Quayle just nodded along and signed whatever documents were needed.  As usual. 

Beecroft had thought that Ministers had the power to change things and such heresy had to be dealt with severely.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Roger Mexico said:

Beecroft (as was) tried to change things from the top and got sacked by Greenhow for trying (while Quayle who didn't have the guts to do it himself, sulked in the corner and tried to make it better with a bunch of flowers)

 

6 minutes ago, Jarndyce said:

Do you mean that Couch complained to Quayle, and Quayle sacked her?

Ouch! - two factual corrections in under 15 minutes: I’ve let myself down, I’ve let my family down, I’ve let the Forum down, etc…

  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Jarndyce said:

Having listened to the clip on the website, I don’t understand why a minister of such insight - and drive to makes changes - was ever allowed to leave the post!

He just cannot resist opening his mouth to remove all doubt, (to bastardise a quote). 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Jarndyce said:

Fair enough - good on yer!

Here we go.

There is a lazy myth that all nurses are angels and all doctors are demi-gods.  Flowing from this is a lazy assumption that they can't be criticised.

However, health and social care are full of really nasty people - some of whom don't care about the people that they are supposed to be looking after, and many of whom bully their colleagues relentlessly.  It is often the nasty ones who then form cliques, become union activists and throw out the concept of 'professional autonomy' to fend off any attempts by management to achieve good services that could be benchmarked against the best in the UK (as the CQC has tried to do).

Those cliques are canny too, and know how to get to the politicians.  This means that they are never challenged, and the politicians seek glory for awesome policies like little Finley getting his special medicine.

It can be changed through imposing standards etc. in law - which they are not in the Isle of Man, and obliging professionals contractually to deliver them.  Courage is needed from politicians and managers, but this would not be rocket science.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Roxanne said:

It’s good to have you back with your input Apple. You’ve been missed on this topic - and others. 

Kind of you to say so, and others have supported the comment. Thank you for that.

Having said that, some of the insights demonstrated by several posters are in my view totally correct and I am sad /glad in a away it is all coming out into the open. 

The island deserves better, it will get better (somehow), it needs to get better.

My concern at the moment is we need a fully functioning staff team for A and E, trained up to the highest standards, and not just for TT. Would anyone propose a high speed road race as things stand today ? Would anyone come and watch if they knew the state of play ? 

Question. for Tynwald I think.

Good to be back, so far 😀

 

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Boo Gay'n said:

Richard Butt, the editor of the newspapers, has just put this on Twitter -

The CQC report was dropped off anonymously at IoMN nerve centre. We put in queries. Then the DHSC published it to all and sundry before we went to press.

OK, hands up. Who was it ? It was one of you ........🤫

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Boo Gay'n said:

Richard Butt, the editor of the newspapers, has just put this on Twitter -

The CQC report was dropped off anonymously at IoMN nerve centre. We put in queries. Then the DHSC published it to all and sundry before we went to press.

I’m guessing this report would have been covered up or at least not published for long period of time, if wasn’t for it being leaked to the local press. Well done whoever it was. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Ham_N_Eggs said:

It is privatisation through the backdoor but then this is what they wanted when they created Manx Care.

The big issue is if they sack off all the bad apples who is going to replace them? There is a shortage of staff across the whole of the UK. If a private healthcare operator comes in to run Nobles they will run it from the UK and we will, eventually, end up paying more for healthcare.  

 

Whichever way IOMG decides to operate DHSC (in particular Nobles) it will cost more, private or otherwise. Health care ain't cheap because both ends of the (suppy) chain begins and ends with people. People are expensive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, Boo Gay'n said:

There is a lazy myth that all nurses are angels and all doctors are demi-gods.  Flowing from this is a lazy assumption that they can't be criticised.

Agreed.

38 minutes ago, Boo Gay'n said:

However, health and social care are full of really nasty people - some of whom don't care about the people that they are supposed to be looking after, and many of whom bully their colleagues relentlessly.

Agreed!

39 minutes ago, Boo Gay'n said:

It is often the nasty ones who then form cliques

Agreed!

39 minutes ago, Boo Gay'n said:

become union activists and throw out the concept of 'professional autonomy' to fend off any attempts by management to achieve good services that could be benchmarked against the best in the UK (as the CQC has tried to do).

This is where we start to diverge.   The most dangerous and nasty clique in recent times (IMHO) was the “”sisters doing it for themselves” under A. Murray - and that was definitely “top-down” bullying and included Dr Ranson as a victim, incidentally.

 

42 minutes ago, Boo Gay'n said:

Those cliques are canny too, and know how to get to the politicians.  This means that they are never challenged, and the politicians seek glory for awesome policies like little Finley getting his special medicine.

Can you back up which clique managed this?  My understanding at the time was that this was a bit of private enterprise by Beecroft, going against both policy and top level advice to get a personal victory in the press.   This is not to criticise the family in question, who I’m sure lobbied effectively for their child - but they’re hardly a “clique”, are they?

More that we agree upon than disagree, I think…but approaching from different perspectives.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...