...perhaps the secondary care providers could use some of their block payments to monitor and investigate the patients referred in...
...of course if they want an other organisation to do this the government has been handing out national contracts for testing...
Matt could then topslice the 2ry care budget to fund the work trusts are not doing...
GPs to continue doing their jobs referring appropriately.
Stories circulating about CQC calling in management consultants to review all its processes.
GOod way to waste loads of money before they realise it can't be fixed as fundamental principle is flawed.
How many new formulations are 'advised' by non-prescribing 'specialist nurses' with little or no supportt from their supervising consultants?
Having devolved responsibility for the NHS to an arms length body, ministers find that they cannot stop dealing with bedpans themselves.
The current plan seems to be to give single national contracts for single aspects of the NHS, test and trace, seperate from 'swabbing'. Perhaps McDonalds will be given the national contract for primary care? GPs will have to step up our move to drive-in services, for our new clown overlords. Deliveroo will fight off Uber for a GP home visit service provided on bicycles, procured under the eBay home visit supplies portal. Helmets available branded but in one size with a fixed visor preventing vision.
The cost will go up immensely, and the tax return will drop significantly, but investors will be happy. and the public love old Boris. He saved the world.
trouble is you might struggle to get hold of supplies as those are being cut off at the centre.
There will still be a role for 'patient care' but it will be boutique, 'for profit' organisations, some with doctor partners, but many where we are cheap tech. staff manning rotas.
..but 'revalidation is just a paper exercise' they say; their admission would seem to suggest that it does drain resources..
It is the 5 appraisals that you have to have had which will complicate things a little, or will that requirement be suspended too?
Interesting that '5000' new doctors were found (unilaterally added back to the register) by scrapping many of these administrative carbuncles of medical regulation.
...they are under your bed..
This is another lever which will help this otherwise incompetent government achieve its expressed aim of replacing general practice with corporate 'primary care'.
Sadly it is also managing its project of reforming its NHS governance ruthlessly and effectively too, without any transparency or scrutiny; that is, without the stuff of which 'democracy' is made.
does 1 glove count as ppe or does it need to be 2?
Mr Hancock has requested credit for getting thousands of nurses back into practice, ?doctors too. Of course all he did was draw a big crayon line through the register where it said retired. Many of these clinicians have no intention of working. Even those who want to are being stopped by the remaining obstacles.
We can equally claim credit as the (temporary)removal of appraisal and revalidation, crown indemnity, and reduced threat from the GMC have had as much effect as the secretary of state, when he does what we suggest he gets results?!
What data do they think we have?
Deloitte, Boots, Circle,Randox... they are the ones who have been paid to take the data to spin into gold.
We just have the patients to look after with reducing resources, in cities which are seen as expendable, whilst they suck the wealth out of the British economy with the straw held for them by the establishment.
Please, stop this big data nonsense.
The data makes sense at the level for which it is intended. There are things which can be trawled for by algorithms, but the noise/signal ratio on this data effectively filters what is needed in this context.
Pass the resource down to the DPHs and CCGS, or PCNs or practices, some wont cope but most will do more than you can even imagine.
The law has always been clear.
It is good the that the government's legal department has reinforced the clear indications of the recent coronavirus act and the earlier coroner's act.
It is odd that legally trained coroners have fallen foul of sentiment with the guidance they have given so far.
The health and safety exec will be very busy investigating the employers who fail to provide safe workplaces.
One key aspect of a safe workplace is adequate protective equipment. Failure to provide this is a reason for significant fines and closure of workplaces.
Responsibility for ensuring compliance with HaSaW legislation is the responsibility of employers and employees.
The HaSaW notice should be on display in all workplaces with the number to call if you need advice from the the health and safety executive.
no answers only questions
How many of the 107,000 will die? (statistically?)
Interesting that senior coroners feel that the coronavirus act 2020 is not a clear indication of the intention of the law to support the straightforward and simplest interpretation of the processes around death.
Their defence that it does not specifically mention this part of the process ignores the clear intention of the legislators.
They can also infer this intention from all the other changes to the process around death since the initial proposals by the Home secretary in 2003, following a senior review of the whole area, Not least that the specific proposal, of introducing what they claim, has not been included in any legislation since, as it is clearly absurd.
The absurdity is now compounded by this rapid and poorly thought through 'clarification'. The law remains clear. There is no duty for anyone regarding confirmation or verification of death.
Any competent adult, that is, anyone not mentally incapacitated, can identify a dead body, and report this to the coroner.
The coroner's contention that only a person with training, or other qualification, for this role is simply wrong, legally, and logically.
We are the government and we know what is going on in every nook and cranny of the country.
We have the luxury of more time to deal with everything that is going on the the lives of everyone of your patients than you do.
..or we are deluded...
..Perhaps if they trusted 'public servants and professionals' as much as they trust 'deloitte' 'randox' 'capita' 'circle' et al...
Why is the 'private' economy more important than the lives of healthcare workers?
Is 'ebay' doing this for the benefit of the UK?
Are the profits going to be declared and tax paid?
The Chancellor said we will pay what it costs to get Britain through this. His close friends and associates have spent every moment since making sure that the maximum proportion of that money is spent directly by central government through large corporations who have dubious connections with the idea of tax in a caring society.
How much of the difficulty is the continued use of one particular record system for out of hours services?
perhaps they should worry that their position has been significantly eroded by the coronavirus act 2020.
In not having to be informed about deaths where covid is a possibility they have been specifically stood down from one of their key roles, one where there is now increasing scrutiny.
There is the potential that it will not be put back given the development of the 'medical examiner' system.