126. Evidence submitted by James Halsey
(PPI 20)
1. I have been involved as a lay person
in the NHS for many years in a number of different areas, namely:
I work as a volunteer in A&E.
I have sat on a number of committees
in my local acute hospital trust.
I am attached to the Patient and
Carer Network at the Royal College of Physicians (London).
I have sat on 63 Independent Review
Panels (under the previous NHS complaints process).
I accepted an appointment as an associate
with the Healthcare Commission with a view to becoming involved
in the new complaints process.
2. I was proud and felt privileged to be
involved with the previous complaints process which I knew to
be truly independent and free from interference from any quarter
and hoped that the new complaints process under the Healthcare
Commission would be likewise.
3. I believe that there have been very few
independent review panels held since the Healthcare Commission
took responsibility for complaints and that finance may be one
of the major considerations when deciding whether or not to hold
an Independent Review Panel.
4. In my view the new complaints process
is not patient-focused and the correspondence from the Healthcare
Commission to complainants is not personalised in any way and
because I feel so strongly about the independence of any NHS complaints
process have declined to be involved in the new complaints process,
a decision that has given me real concern.
5. As far as I am aware there has not been
any public satisfaction survey regarding the new complaints process
but as you are aware the strength of any survey depends on the
questions.
6. I was also appointed to the Patient and
Public Involvement Forum at my local acute hospitals trust but
resigned after six months as I felt the implementation process
was rushed and the Forums were poorly trained, resourced and supported
and despite having statutory powers to monitor and inspect healthcare
services, lay people are not equipped to do so and need clinical
advice and support to be effective.
7. The majority of the public are unaware
of the existence and function of PPI Forums, the majority of which
have had little impact and have been ineffective. Their function
also depends upon the genuine co-operation of the Trust.
8. I am passionate about patient and public
involvement in the NHS but unfortunately my experience is that
in the majority of cases it is a tick-box exercise. The only exception
is my involvement with the Patient and Carer Network at the Royal
College of Physicians (London). Members are involved in all College
activities where they have an equal voice as College members and
their input is encouraged, welcomed and valued. I think the Patient
and Carer network is a model of genuine Patient and Public Involvement
in the NHS and you might like to consider contacting the Patient
Involvement Unit at the College for more details.
What is the purpose of Patient and Public involvement?
9. To bring the voice of an informed public
to those making decisions on the provision of healthcare with
the aim of improving standards of healthcare and ensuring its
availability as and when needed. To make robust efforts to try
and ensure that it is a National Health Service and not a "Postcode
Health Service."
What form of Patient and Public involvement is
desirable, practical and offers good value for money?
10.
Volunteering (for reasons below).
Not subject to any government targets,
entirely patient and staff focused.
Free from interference from any quarter.
Criminal Records Bureau (CRB) checked.
No cost involved apart from identifiable
clothing.
Know staff, geography and structure
of NHS site.
Can carry out in patient surveys
for PALS officers and any other approved Agency.
Eyes and ears of the public.
Can address concerns before they
become complaints.
The Institute of Volunteering Research
is undertaking a project to gauge the impact of Volunteering in
the NHS.
Why are existing systems for patient and public
involvement being reformed after three years?
11. The implementation process for PPI Forums
was rushed and the Forums were poorly trained, support and equipped.
Even though they had statutory powers to monitor and inspect Healthcare
Services they were not equipped to do so, needing clinical support
and advice to be effective. The majority of the public had no
idea of the existence of PPI Forums and their function and the
majority have had little impact and have been ineffective.
How should LINKS be designed?
12. Look at the failings and shortcomings
of the PPI Forums, take stock, learn lessons and ensure that the
same mistakes do not happen again.
In what circumstances should wider public consultation
(including under Section 11 Health and Social Care Act 2001) be
carried out and what form should this take?
13. There seems little point on many occasions
of conducting a public consultation process when Government has
already decided to implement major and minor changes to the NHS.
The latest example of yet more changes goes under the title "reconfiguration",
many facets of which have already been implemented despite public
opposition. I would ask you consider obtaining evidence-based
data which confirms that public opinion has changed Government
thinking. Sir Ian Carruthers has been appointed to carry out a
six month review of all plans around the country to cut services
and close Units to see if more can be done to win public support
for change which in my view will take place, despite public opposition.
I am willing to appear before the Health Committee
if required.
James Halsey
3 January 2007
|