Cookie policy notice

By continuing to use this site you agree to our cookies policy below:
Since 26 May 2011, the law now states that cookies on websites can ony be used with your specific consent. Cookies allow us to ensure that you enjoy the best browsing experience.

This site is intended for health professionals only

At the heart of general practice since 1960

Shooting the messenger will get the NHS nowhere

Editor's blog

I have never met Dr Helen Thomas, but I could understand if she felt somewhat vexed right now.

NHS England’s lead for integrated care, Dr Thomas is a woman with a responsible role. A GP for 25 years, she has brought much-needed clinical experience to the design of urgent care services. 

But her reputation has been thrown under a bus by the organisation that employs her.

Dr Thomas has been blamed for ‘misrepresenting’ plans for walk-in patients to be barred from A&E departments unless they had called NHS 111 or out-of-hours services first. Dr Thomas told an urgent care conference that the health secretary had pushed for trials of a ‘talk before you walk’ approach to A&E, adding ‘we may well pilot that’.

One of the Pulse team was present and approached Dr Thomas to confirm what she had said. Dr Thomas said discussions of a pilot were at an early stage, admitting ‘it’s going to be tricky to do it’.

The story was written up and NHS England and the Department of Health were duly contacted for comment. Neither responded in time for publication, but went on the offensive as soon as the story was published and the national media took an interest. 

They originally tried to say the Pulse story was false, but switched tactics when we published a recording of the comments from Dr Thomas, which was as clear as a bell. An NHS England spokesperson suggested Dr Thomas had misled them about what she had said, and then a DH press officer protested: ‘Dr Thomas’ comments were not representing the actual situation, do please let us know if you plan on taking this story down.’

Of course, Pulse did not take it down; we are not going to be told what to publish by the DH. And eventually NHS England apologised for suggesting our reporting of Dr Thomas' comments was false. But the real casualty in all this was Dr Thomas. I have listened to the recording and she sounds like a straight-talking, sensible person who perhaps was not aware there was a Pulse journalist in the room.

The plans she spoke of may be questionable, particularly for their potential impact on GPs, but the instinct to pilot them is sound. The problem here is a system that is so politicised that any sensitive ideas are binned at the first squeak from the Daily Mail.

There is a real need for the NHS to think radically about how it can cope this winter. I don’t know if barring all walk-in patients from emergency departments is the answer, but I have yet to see any radical ideas that could help convince patients to think twice before they attend.

The strange thing is that Dr Thomas has been in post while some positive changes have been made. NHS 111 is finally bringing more clinical input into calls and there have been moves to improve triage of ambulance calls, albeit with an additional two-minute delay now. She is precisely the kind of person who should be shaping how the health service responds to its challenges. But I wouldn’t blame her if she walked away from NHS England in protest at how she has been treated.

We need more radical thinking, not less. Leave playing politics to the toddlers in Richmond House.

Nigel Praities is editor of Pulse. You can follow him on Twitter @nigelpraities

Rate this article  (4.5600000000000005 average user rating)

Click to rate

  • 1 star out of 5
  • 2 stars out of 5
  • 3 stars out of 5
  • 4 stars out of 5
  • 5 stars out of 5

0 out of 5 stars

Readers' comments (3)

  • Actually, Nigel, the system just needs more money!

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Cobblers

    No Shaba the NHS will never have enough money. Radical thought is needed, very much so, and implemented.

    The nationals I see have picked up on the private GP vote. They seem shocked. They shouldn't be it is coming, if not now then soon.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Vinci Ho

    To some degree , I agree to the ideology of bringing in radical thinking but these thoughts very much depend on existing resources and in this case , the relationship between the state and its frontline delivery personnels .
    My definition of resources are always money , expertise , manpower and time all in a package.
    The 'positive' story of NHS111 mentioned here showed expertise was the resource NHS111 needed whereas it can no longer argued that you need more manpower in A/E department and general practice particularly in out of hours.
    Indemnity cover for these OOH GPs is nothing but money as a resource.
    Problem with these doctors working for NHSE is they want to act with good faith(which is nothing wrong to me)staying away from politics .
    But reality is our relationship with this government is so polarised that any 'pilot' suggestion like this is enough to catch her in the lines of fire in this ongoing war.
    With the health secretary appearing quite 'honest' answering questions in House of Commons today will no doubt make some of our moderate colleagues sympathising NHSE call for our compromises for the sake of our patients.
    As I wrote in the other article, a politician would want to tell the truth only when he/she has no actual alternative politically and circumstancially.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

Have your say