In the face of the long NHS waiting lists, lack of hospital beds, failure to address social care, lack of NHS medics, incompetent management and falling standards of care, on June 8th the Government NHS website proclaimed the publication of its report as the “Biggest shake-up in health and social care leadership in a generation to improve patient care”. This so-called ‘landmark’ review into health and social care leadership led by General Sir Gordon Messenger and Dame Linda Pollard was announced in a press release on the website.
The website statements are full of rhetoric but without clear meaning: “The review team met over a thousand passionate front-line staff, managers and leaders across health and social care.” And I thought: What is a passionate staff member? How did they define or measure “passion”? Were some more “passionate” than others? And isn’t “passion” a bit of a danger? Do I really want a passionate doctor or nurse looking after me? No, I want a competent and kind professional, not someone who is “passionate”.
Then I read in the press release that the review found what they called “an ‘institutional inadequacy’ in the way that leadership and management is trained, developed and valued”. What does this mean? What is training for management that is not adequate? And what does the report mean about leadership and management that is “valued”? Here again is wishy-washy rhetoric. What are the ‘values’ that should be valued? And how should one show a leader or manager he or she is valued? A pay rise? Biscuits with a cup of tea? Champagne nights out? Holidays in the sun?
And again, the press report states that the review team “found evidence of poor behaviours and attitudes such as discrimination, bullying and blame culture”. This sounds rather threatening to me. How do they define “poor behaviours”, or “poor attitudes” or “discrimination’” or “bullying” or “blame”? Especially when everyone they met, “over a thousand people”, were “passionate”?
Does the full report give more data and detail for these vague statements given to the press? What is the detailed evidence behind the press release?
The full report does not give data or evidence for its statements. There is no appendix of evidence. There are no supporting data attached. There are no records of meetings. Instead it expands the rhetoric – interviewees were not just “passionate” they were also “devoted” and “hardworking”. How did the review team know this, I wondered.
The full report seems to me to include at least five contradictions.
It begins with a message from Sir Gordon: “I have encountered nothing but friendliness, candour, self-reflection, pragmatism and support from the impressive array of experts, front-line staff, academics, service users and leaders who willingly gave us their time to share their views.” The report seems to indicate that he and his review colleagues have based this review on the opinions of the people they met. But is this this an adequate basis for a formal review?
Here is contradiction number one: Subjective opinions (however friendly and reflective) are not evidence. Sir Gordon and Dame Linda may have met some truly impressive and “passionate” people, but that is not an objective assessment or measure of the care given to actual patients in the U.K. health care system. After all, words are cheap.
The second contradiction follows from this: Sir Gordon states that he and Dame Linda (now his “good friend”) bought together an “excellent”, “inclusive and diverse team” which “included representatives from the Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC), NHS England, Health Education England, NHSX and social care leaders, as well as clinicians, managers and academics – all bringing their own lived experience and personal knowledge of the health and care system”. If this was such an excellent, inclusive and diverse team, why are there any problems that need changing? Surely it’s not possible to better excellence? And what is meant by their “lived experience”. How can this be measured or assessed? Is this just how interviewees felt about their “lived experience” on this particular day?
The third contradiction is this: The review team had a “listen and learn” phase. They engaged with “more than 1,000 stakeholders on over 400 different occasions, plus welcoming contribution from all via an open email address”. They did not appear to have gone out into hospitals or community health and social care to look for themselves and to gain their own objective “lived experience”. The methods do not seem to have included visits out of the office (or maybe even away from zoom at home). They do not seem to have gone into wards where patients are being looked after.
The fourth contradiction follows: The review comments on the “excellent” progress made since the Francis Report (2013). But as with the rest of the report, no data or evidence are given to support this wildly generalising and very vague statement. Staff are passionate, devoted and committed but, as the review concludes, there is a culture of discrimination and bullying and blame. This is contradiction number four. Some of these interviewees must have been blaming colleagues to the review team. Otherwise how would they reach this conclusion? The ‘no-blame’ culture desired for the NHS was obviously not being practised by the interviewees giving their critical opinions to the review team.
The fifth contradiction is the apparent lack of understanding of everyday patient care by the review team. This is no better illustrated than in the deeply cynical statement in the review: “Senior nurses talked about ‘going to the dark side’ as a comment often made when they moved into senior management roles.” Senior nurses in management, by moving away from the coal face, don’t seem to understand the everyday realities of practice. They are disconnected from frontline patient care. No amount of postgraduate seminar training (that the review calls for) will remedy this.
So what is the Government intention and objective behind this very vague ‘landmark’ report? Is it to improve health and social care for the population? No, as the press release concludes, the intention is to “ensure the Government and the NHS can continue to tackle disparities across the country”. Ah, the levelling up agenda!
A further contradiction relating to who really wrote and influenced the report appears in the YouTube interview of Sir Gordon Messenger by Sajid Javid.
Sir Gordon Messenger is clear that in his view:
The best way that people learn leadership is not in the classroom. It’s through watching others they respect and admire and how they do it. And so there’s definitely something contagious about good leadership. I think that can have a top down approach so if you’ve got a good leader at the top it’s incredible how quickly one can set the tone for the entire organisation.
Thus spoke the soldier, General Messenger.
So leadership cannot be taught, he says, it must be caught. And this is very similar to how health care leadership and management developed in this country and in particular how the nursing profession developed. It was Florence Nightingale’s view. It was the basis for hospital leadership through the working together of doctors and nurses, matrons, medical superintendents, consultants, ward sisters, staff nurses and student nurses, together with the hospital administrator. The Francis report (2013) also held this view.
Oddly, Sir Gordon’s view on leadership does not seem to be given room in either the press release or the full report, despite Sir Gordon’s position as a leader of the review. This makes me wonder how much influence he really had in writing this report. Leadership being caught in practice rather than taught in the classroom is wholly missing from the report and its recommendations. Instead, the recommendation of the review is yet more vague wording. According to the press release, recommendations include “an induction for new joiners to instil core values across health and social care, a mid-career programme for managers, stronger action on equality and diversity to ensure inclusive leadership at all levels, clear leadership and management standards for NHS managers with a standardised appraisal system, and greater incentives for top talent to move into leadership roles in areas facing the greatest challenges, to help combat disparities across the country”.
And in particular the third of the seven recommendations in the press release completely contradicts Sir Gordon’s view that leadership is caught not taught: “Consistent management standards delivered through accredited training, including a single set of unified, core leadership and management standards for NHS managers, and a curriculum of training and development to meet these standards, with completion of this training made a prerequisite to advance to more senior roles.”
This review is yet another costly (by how much we are not told) white elephant that, to mix metaphors, does not address several elephants in the room. It is yet more grandiloquent bombast full of words signifying nothing. It reiterates concepts such “inclusion and diversity” without explaining what they mean, and more importantly, how this will benefit patient care.
The King’s Fund has responded about one of said pachyderms. Suzie Bailey comments: “However, the elephant in the room is really the deep workforce crisis that predates the pandemic and that the Government has been quite reluctant to face up to. There is a huge number of vacancies, staff are exhausted, they were exhausted before the pandemic.” She added: “This review is welcome but my concerns is will it actually address the size of the workforce crisis?”
In fact, the NHS depends now on taking health care workers from other countries. One of these countries is Nigeria, which maintains the nurse training model of apprenticeship in a school of nursing, rejected several decades ago by the U.K. nursing elite, which is arguably a major contributing factor to the current U.K. nursing shortage.
This report fails to tackle another very big elephant in the room: the scathing reports on the NHS such as Francis (2013), Kirkup (2015), CQC (2018) and Ockenden (2022). “These are major markers in our lack of sustained patient safety system culture,” according to John Tingle, a lecturer in law.
These elephants – staff shortages and poor standards of care – could also be addressed by reforming nurse training to bring back student nurses into the paid workforce, away from the university seminar rooms, so that they can learn nursing leadership, management and values from their colleagues in practice. The Francis report (2013) was also concerned about current methods of nurse training. Perhaps Sir Gordon, with his stress on leadership being caught not taught, might agree?
This report of a whitewash review is deeply depressing. It does not focus on the practicalities of improving the care of patients and simply reinforces the public impression that nothing can change and that the NHS is still a captive of the elite managerial cadre which successfully resists all and any calls for a genuine ‘shake up’ of an institution chronically sick from top to bottom. Care for patients is not the NHS priority. Don’t get ill in the UK!
Dr. Ann Bradshaw is a retired lecturer in Adult Health Care.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
https://www.conservativewoman.co.uk/other-cancer-specialists-agree-with-me-about-vaccine-harm-but-the-authorities-still-wont-listen/
The Angus Dalgleish article has disappeared.
Yes, I was just going to ask if it was my computer or not. Hmmm, very interesting.
I was just reading the comments and it refreshed and vanished.
Perhaps it has been receiving too much traffic.
Hopefully, but if it disappears from TCW as well, then someone is definitely censoring it.
It certainly makes you wonder doesn’t it? I mean, we all know we’re being watched the entire time, but this site does seem to suffer from an awful lot of glitchy issues. Never a week goes by without something. If it’s not ‘invasion of the nonces’ it’s something else. I have my posts edited and removed by Hardlines as well, so the walls definitely have eyes around here! LOL It would be nice if one of the DS team could drop a comment to explain the disappearance but I shan’t hold my breath.
I will second that Mogs.
I agree completely.
Can I get a downtick as well for agreeing with everyone above. Go on – pretty please.
I get the nonces on this site too when I never use the word, and last week on tcw I had a complete ban for a couple of hours even though I hadn’t posted, and hadn’t received a notification. I wonder if the new government censoring laws are already being adopted
Yeah I got a nonced the other day here. Also been told I used profanity and thus couldn’t post my comment all without a swear word in site. All very odd!?
“..if it disappears from TCW as well,”
Kathy Gyngell won’t easily fold.
Indeed.
Yes. I had just requested that someone as eminent and visible as he should term modified RNA gene therapies more accurately than “mRNA vaccines”.
Yes, I saw your comment which was about the time I nipped over to TCW to see how many articles Dr Dalgleish has posted there. Five now. I was on my way back when I realised the article had disappeared. It is still live at TCW and so is my link on the German article here at DS.
Indeed, with emphasis on the *modified*. That is what the name Moderna literally signifies: modRNA or modified RNA.
https://www.conservativewoman.co.uk/mrna-vaccines-must-be-banned-once-and-for-all/
Here it is.
Well done
Thanks Freddy.
It is there now, HP. The one calling for the end of mRNA ‘vaccines’ that is.
It has not been reinstated ATL Aethelred.
I’ll be honest though, hux. When I refer to the ’77th Hamster Penis Brigade’, this is the kind of image my mind conjures up;
https://twitter.com/DrLoupis/status/1707669189207437474
Perhaps there is some confusion – the article has been taken off DS.
The article has NOT been removed from TCW and I have checked frequently.
It’ll probably be back but not today. It’s available on TCW https://www.conservativewoman.co.uk/mrna-vaccines-must-be-banned-once-and-for-all/.
With all due respect Will your statement simply sets the jungle drums off again. What is the problem?
I know. Why the secrecy? Transparency is always appreciated, please and thank you!
I can access it via my vpn. Should still be there.
Still there.
Just clicked the link and it was there. It was from 2022 so was there an up-dated version?
It’s here OK
Thanks for this link. Just read the article, which is deeply shocking and authoritatively authored by someone who initially believed one thing and came to believe another by simply following the evidence. Incontrovertible.
Thank you excellent article. Pity it’s not heeded.
I was just reading through comments for this article and clicked to a link where the author (correct?) was promoting vaccine uptake in 2021 but when I returned, the article was gone. What happened?
https://dailysceptic.org/2023/09/29/mrna-vaccines-must-be-banned-once-and-for-all/
Still there.
Are you using a VPN though? If even Will says it’s not there then it can’t be there, right? I’m confused.com…
Page not found. It doesn’t show on the home page either. What happens if you refresh the page?
I downloaded it to read later & that has gone as well. I guess it was not compatible with his job in the NHS.
https://www.conservativewoman.co.uk/mrna-vaccines-must-be-banned-once-and-for-all/
For those who might be wondering what the fuss is about.
According to the comments section over at TCW Calvin Robinson has been suspended for supporting Dan Wootton.
Firkin unbelievable.
GB News is killing itself.
Get a grip you cowards!
How do we get rid of them ?!
Just found this in the comments at TCW..
“The Greek government has just announced that instead of paying benefits to illegal migrants they will be put to work digging the roads or on construction sites.”
RNLI are going to be busy.
I can imagine that not many migrants will hang around there then despite the wonderful summer weather, souvlaki and Greek salad. Sitting around on your arse with a mobile phone in a 4 star hotel with free doctors/dentists, a weekly allowance and plenty of food over here will be an even bigger draw. RNLI boats will be very busy indeed…
The thing is, even if migrants work (which is preferable obviously to them getting benefits) I think we have had far too many and need to stop for a long time. Social cohesion is fragile; we should proceed with caution. People who grew up in other cultures behave according to different norms – I think ours are better but that’s not the point, we are just different and time is needed to settle things down, or understand that they cannot be settled down and that the project was a terrible idea.
Thing is, they’ll have the cheek to complain about here if the radiator in their fully paid for full board accommodation doesn’t work.
I respect the contributions of both yourself and huxleypiggles, but the the “RNLI are going to be busy” and “..RNLI boats will be very busy indeed..” comments are no better than the lazy, kneejerk comments you rightly ascribe to the MSM.
Are you aware of what the RNLI’s function is? It’s to ‘Save Lives at Sea’.
The Coastguard tasks the boats’ crews to fulfil that task, nothing more & nothing less. They don’t add the rider “that is if they’re only WASP, yacht owning DS contributors, but not if they’re migrants at risk of drowning”. I’m a shore based volunteer and I’m sure that some of the boats’ crews have similar views about the necessity of the tasks they have to carry out, especially the Dungeness and Dover crews, but carry them out they do – they are not judgemental at all in their volunteering to ‘Save Lives at Sea’ Otherwise they would have to stand down as volunteers.
Do you similarly expect ambulance and fire crews to respond only to injuries and fires/RTAs as long as they’re not illegal migrants?
Can I suggest your justifiable anger is directed to the French authorities who, in spite of the £ millions of UK taxpayers’ money bunged their way, have a Nelsonian sight issue; as in “I see no overloaded inflatables”. But I’m sure it’s got nothing to do with punishing the UK for daring to leave (ho ho) the EU?
And not just the RNLI. This is what I shared under the Round-up. These people are despicable traitors;
”There are currently 8 German NGO ships in the Mediterranean Sea collecting illegal immigrants to be unloaded in Italy. These NGOs are subsidized by the German government. Let’s hope AfD wins the elections to stop this European suicide.”
https://twitter.com/RadioGenoa/status/1707716388603781398
This pertains more to the ‘disappeared’ article by Prof Dalgleish, but I like it because it’s one image which sums up exactly why the godforsaken toxic bioweapons should be removed forthwith and production of it ( and all other mRNA-based vaccines ) ceased. Of course that will never happen because they want us dead/injured/infertile, so all excess deaths, evidence contradicting the ”safe and effective” sales pitch and reports from these adverse event systems are basically redundant and to be ignored, forever and ever, amen. Bare in mind this is only comparing to the flu jab, only looking at 2021 for the death jab and then there’s the significant under-reporting factor to consider.
*If this post disappears I’ll know it’s me that’s the jinx!*
https://twitter.com/JesslovesMJK/status/1707703130547540320
All I want to know is who’s going to jail?
Someone must go to jail.
“Increasingly nervous about their role”- good, but doesn’t even begin to cut it, for me. Permanent, crippling fear of exposure, humiliation and retribution (legal or otherwise) would be a start: that constant need to keep looking over your shoulder, always having to scuttle quickly into buildings via the security entrance, minimising the walking time to the door of the official armoured car, always having to keep your future movements private. These people spent three years trying to destroy not just “our freedoms” but also our basic humanity: no, you can’t see your dying wife, no HMQ you’ll have to sit alone, wearing a stupid mask, at your husband’s funeral. They may not have personally perpetrated the worst excesses – like all senior criminals, they got someone else to do the really dirty work – but they could have stopped it with a word. And didn’t. Never forget, never forgive.
Reminders such as these much needed.
What about the Aerosol Mrna threat ? Is it plausible ?
“What about the Aerosol Mrna threat ?”
The aerosol is just another branch of their weaponry and probably chosen to be sheeple friendly. It is less violent appearing than a needle, less aggressive.
The reason this mmRNA junk is being pushed so relentlessly is that it is really more dangerous than we yet know. The perps know the true lethality but I am not yet convinced that our side knows.
We will know within twelve months. What is beyond doubt is that the jabs are intended to kill and kill in massive numbers. I am not convinced that from the DD point of view the required kill rate is being hit.
“Men, it has been well said, think in herds; it will be seen that they go mad in herds, while they only recover their senses slowly, one by one.”
― Charles MacKay, Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds
Backpedalling but mainly in the “mistakes were made, lessons will be learned” vein rather than “sorry it was all lies”. There was no public health emergency. They will never admit that.
Is that a trans man to woman in the photo.
Yes.
Real name – Henry Jarries.
Ten years from now, if not sooner, NO ONE will openly admit to having ever supported lockdowns. Much like no one currently openly admits to having supported the 2003 invasion of Iraq, despite the majority of Americans and Britons supporting it at the beginning. And if the late Christopher Hitchens was still alive, he would likely claim that he somehow had the exact same stance as his polar-opposite brother Peter on both issues, which is clearly not true.
Please see the following video which can be considered damning evidence against any and all that brought lockdowns etc. down on the world. Of course, the perpetrators of all the medically pointless restrictions are not the type of individuals that are seeking enlightenment, but will find ways of camouflaging their actions so as to continue with attempts to control populations.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cb-JExoBhmU&t=61s
Fauci Follows ‘the Science’ | Kate Wand
It is deeper than just narrative collapse. The very underpinnings of western superiority have been swept away in such a short space of time. There is no saving the economic system and the Anglo American superiority in arms, what the Yanks like to call full spectrum dominance, has been shown to be a fraud. The cabal know that they have to manage rapid decline in a very short space of time and now even the most obtuse of the useful idiots can see it and feel it. I don’t have any sympathy for them though. They would’ve sold their own grandmother for a few pieces of silver.That’s why they were so acquiescent. Either that or fear, which is even worse.
Basically you have two choices – either you accept that we are screwed and try to forge a pathway out of it or you can convince yourself that a new lick of paint will do. I can say with certainty that the second option is diminishing by the day and there isn’t going to be some centralised solution to this predicament. At that point you are challeneged to come up with the best way to live moving into the future. Obviously you have to put your family first but that answers nothing. How could you behave in the future, what would it even mean given the absence of a well defined purpose. Our times ask for a very deep and different response. It won’t come quickly but there will be a convergance upon the truth. Of course our numbers as northern Europeans will be greatly diminished but we have to hope that a few will survive. In the 1950s Eliot said that at some point in the near future western civilisation will go back into the monasteries and I think he was right. There is no replacng Christianity with something else. The entry into the world of the Christ impulse is not reversible. He said that heaven and earth shall pass away but his kingdom would not pass away. That doesn’t mean though that the decadent West has infinite licence.
I don’t forget thay wanted to rape me. To stick it in me against my will. Even with my enemies i have never wanted to do that. I would never want humiliate even an arch enemy. But that is what they wanted to do to us. There is no forgiveness or even forbearance just a waiting out of the exposure of their prefidy and lies. If you wish that on me then don’t be surprised at the energy I apply to destroying you because you have invited it.
Thanks for all the comments here from the chattering classes but Jefferson highlights the real concern – so what can we do about it?
The corruption which the Dame Jenny Harries of this world endorse all the time – so that they can do it all again next time and we and our friends and families and children lose more freedom and are forced to take dangerous:
“We are also expecting masses of observational data showing that masks do cut transmission of respiratory viruses down, and so do mRNA vaccines. We know, we know: there are already many trash studies of this sort.
The difference now will be that they will be packaged into systematic reviews led by friendly academics and authoritative new faces that will come to the correct conclusions. It’s amazing what a few quid will do to folk.”
What can we do about this I ask you the chattering folk here. Any thoughts?
In my opinion there was plenty of evidence in March 2020 to say no to any kind of forced social distancing measures and masking as effective prevention or reduction strategies for the spread of Covid-19. That this evidence wasn’t clearly laid out and followed says to me that there were either ulterior motives in play here (financial or a desire to experiment “rule by dictat“), or our scientific and political leaders are “mid wits” as Eugyppius terms them.
A MAO Groupie comes to The minds of some people.
Is it a he or a she?
Speaking of systematic reviews and people who come to highly questionable ‘correct conclusions’, how about this one?
Call for retraction of Jefferson et al’s scientifically unsound review on aluminium and vaccine safety
Elizabeth Hart
Wow. I am shocked. I thought Jefferson was one of the good guys who told the truth about a lot of the false science.
Professor Christopher Exley is the world’s leading expert on aluminium toxicity. You can read about him and his research here.
When he published sound science linking aluminium in vaccines to autism the Guardian published this disgusting piece about it by the disgusting [IMHO] Patrick Greenfield: Keele University accepting funds for researcher who shared vaccine misinformation 1 June 2019.
It was the Guardian piece which was misinformation as can be seen from the examples of Exley’s life’s work on aluminium toxicity.
Despite that Exley and his entire research team were promptly cancelled by Keele University and their access to funding was blocked.
So now you know why the medical establishment says they don’t know what causes autism but they definitely know it is not vaccines.
Just like the Covid injections – perfectly safe and effective – as you all know from reading all the information DS publishes about them like this today:
Covid Vaccines Damage All Hearts, Study Finds
and this:
Nobel Winner Highlighted “Non-Trivial” Side Effects of mRNA Vaccines Including Auto-Immunity and Blood Clotting Risks
and this:
CDC Recommends Everyone Getting Flu and COVID-19 Shots Together Despite No Safety Data
So now you know.
Elizabeth Hart
Wow. I am shocked.
I wrote a reply to your comment in which I explained what happened to Professor Christopher Exley and his Keele University research group after he published science showing neurological damage to children from aluminium.
That was immediately cancelled by DS.
I then revised the reply and posted that thinking I had addressed anything the censors would not approve of – thereby self-censoring my own speech.
The revised reply was immediately cancelled by DS.
Oops. Cancel culture reaches DS?
No free speech?
What is going on?
[I have kept copies of both replies, so I can prove what I wrote.]
Crikey, that is shocking iconoclast…
I’m not making this stuff up.
Here’s the email I sent to Tom Jefferson in March 2013.
More here: Cochrane – Aluminium and vaccine safey.
It’s been covered up for years…
It’s relevant to aluminium-adjuvanted vaccine products, i.e. HPV, meningococcal B, diphtheria/tetanus/pertussis/hib/hep b/pertussis shots, and pneumococcal.
Children are subject to an ever-increasing load of vaccine products, including aluminium-adjuvanted vaccines.
We desperately need an investigation into the schedule, which is mired in conflicts of interest.
See for example my BMJ rapid response published in September 2018: Cochrane HPV vaccine review severely compromised by conflicts of interest.
One of the two vanished posts has now reappeared.
It seems there is a bot removing comments automatically and then hopefully a human takes a look and restores them. No abuse or profanity involved.