Select Committee on Health Written Evidence

47. Evidence submitted from the Chairs of Kensington & Chelsea PCT Forum and Chelsea & Westminster Foundation Trust Forum (PPI 14)

  This is a submission from the Chairs of Kensington & Chelsea PCT Forum and Chelsea & Westminster Foundation Trust Forum. We will follow the format of your terms of reference. Due to time we have not been able to canvass your words with all our members but have been discussing the issues in our meetings since September when CPPIH raised them.

Purpose of patient and public involvement?

  1.  To listen to the voice of patients in the locality and ensure their views are included in service provision and planning of all local health services.

  2.  Thus to raise public influence in improving administration as well as effective treatment.

What form of patient and public involvement is desirable, practical and offers good value for money?

  3.  Volunteers with an interest in local health grouped in one local voluntary and independent organisation, backed by an efficient administration with good local contacts.

Why are existing systems for PPI being reformed after only three years?

  4.  Firstly the Government had set up CPPIH before reforms had their full impact on the NHS. It proved out of touch with local needs as seen by the Forums. Secondly because of the poor design of CPPIH the Forums are only gradually beginning to achieve their purpose.They have influenced the Trusts and acquired valuable experience which can be used.

How should LINKs be designed?

  5.  They must be seen to be part of the public response to the NHS and so independent of statutory bodies (PCT and Borough Council). As far as possible they should be democratic in recruitment and governance and, like other voluntary associations, dedicated to their mission. Funding should be agreed purpose-built for a LINK. So should staffs in their motivation. They should focus upon Local Government Areas and the communities within them. They should have powers to enter, research and inspect, and get answers. Relations with local health Trusts should be based upon mutual respect and respect for patients. National coordination may help by gaining other models of effectiveness but central domination could threaten the localness and independence of LINKs.

How relate to and avoid overlap with:—

  6.  LG structures including OSCs? Council officers should be trained (probably through the CEO) to resource and support the Borough Health actions of the LINK. An alliance with the OSC seems natural. Foundation Trust Boards and Members Councils? Should relate to Links as now PCTs try to Forums. However the funding/commissioning as now by PCTs will need examining. Inspectorates including Healthcare Commission? LINKs should use them but check carefully information which varies from their own. Formal and informal complaints? LINKs will need to promote actively better standards and more usable information by professionals from PALS and ICAS.

Wider Public Consultation?

  7.  Wider consultation should be used when it is necessary to prove to the public that new actions by Trusts or Borough Social Care Services singly or together will benefit the public. LINKs should act as public advocates in each consultation. They should also be ready to insist on layperson's language.

Kensington & Chelsea PCT and Chelsea & Westminster Foundaton Trust Forum

29 December 2006

previous page contents next page

House of Commons home page Parliament home page House of Lords home page search page enquiries index

© Parliamentary copyright 2007
Prepared 6 February 2007