howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
i do not see that argument holding water, of course the media will cherry pick out of it and give their view, we have a mixed press so no problem.
anything that runs into thousands of pages must be viewed with suspicion and proves that bureaucrats are making jobs for themselves.
But it doesn't!! It is simply a tool to reduce risks!!!
Actually,you have just proven peters point. people will read it without context and do, as you have done, and reached conclusions without basis.
Guest 698- Registered: 28 May 2010
- Posts: 8,664
Howard as well as the strategic risk aspect, the risk register covers thousands of NHS sites, dozens of specialisms and hundreds of NHS trusts. How could it not run to thousands of pages? Or do you just want edited highlights? If that's all you want, keep buying the Daily Mail.
I'm an optimist. But I'm an optimist who takes my raincoat - Harold Wilson
Guest 698- Registered: 28 May 2010
- Posts: 8,664
It actually reduces bureaucracy because the register can be consulted by NHS staff instead of reinventing the wheel by repeating a risk analysis which has been done before.
I'm an optimist. But I'm an optimist who takes my raincoat - Harold Wilson
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
confused now peter, you refer to the left putting a slant on it then the daily mail comes into play.
never purchased that organ, read them all online to get a balanced view on things.
why if we are trusted to elect governments can we not have a view on this topic?
Guest 698- Registered: 28 May 2010
- Posts: 8,664
Of course we can have a view, but a view based on facts. If the facts aren't clear, neither can our view be.
I'm an optimist. But I'm an optimist who takes my raincoat - Harold Wilson
Guest 653- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,540
Very well put Peter; we may not be able to read all the facts (mentioned sometime before), but nonetheless it is - or should be, a view based on facts, rather than prejudices.
Roger
Reading these threads I fail to see how those prejudices will be overcome, especially by simply flinging a specialist tool that requires a degree of insight at people who won't understand it - not because of any lack on their part but because it is, simply, a specialist tool.
Guest 716- Registered: 9 Jun 2011
- Posts: 4,010
Sooooooo............the risk register must only be for the chosen few.............and the public just accept the eventual
consequencies............seems par for the `present` course............
What bit are you not getting? It isn't "secret" or sinister, just a tool used by many people to REDUCE RISKS. It isn't there to be difficult or subversive. It is a specialist tool that serves a purpose, but could be misinterpreted in the wrong hjands because it is specialist and comprehensive, and it is specialist and comprehensive in order to reduce as many risks as possible. It is, in fact, our friend, a good thing.
Would you expect to have a say in which bit gets cut out if you are sick? Would you expect to understand all the surgeon does? Or would youi think it sinister because he didn't show you all the textbooks and workings?
Its been Par for the course since at least the early 90s Under Labour it was the same. If it was ok then why is it not ok now or did everyone demanding sight of the info now demand it then ? And if so what where their public comments at that time ?
Guest 698- Registered: 28 May 2010
- Posts: 8,664
If anyone who doesn't trust the NHS risk professionals to do their job (and who wants to micro-manage the process) really wants the information, they can always make a FoI request.
I'm an optimist. But I'm an optimist who takes my raincoat - Harold Wilson
Paul Watkins- Location: Dover
- Registered: 9 Nov 2011
- Posts: 2,226
Well its appear the Health Bill has completed its passage thru. Parliament & I imagine now only needs Royal Asssent.
Watty
Guest 698- Registered: 28 May 2010
- Posts: 8,664
Not quite, Paul. It's just completing the HoL report stage. Next is the third reading, then each house votes on the other's amendments (ping-pong), then Royal Assent. It's all over bar the shouting but dont expect Royal Assent before the end of April.
http://services.parliament.uk/bills/2010-12/healthandsocialcare.htmlI'm an optimist. But I'm an optimist who takes my raincoat - Harold Wilson
Paul Watkins- Location: Dover
- Registered: 9 Nov 2011
- Posts: 2,226
Thanks Peter.
Watty
Guest 698- Registered: 28 May 2010
- Posts: 8,664
Based on previous experience with Bills of similar complexity, expect Royal Assent on Weds 2 May.
I'm an optimist. But I'm an optimist who takes my raincoat - Harold Wilson
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
we can only hope that her majesty understands it a lot better than the rest of us.
The chances are high.........
Guest 683- Registered: 11 Feb 2009
- Posts: 1,052
Better to publish and then tackle the questions raised head on than state that it would be taken out of context or we simply wouldn't be able to understand it.
Greater openness would lead to a more constructive debate rather than the dismissive/distrusting arguments that we have at present fed by paucity of information.
We trust surgeons because we assume they have done the appropriate training and they could no doubt prove this if we chose to ask. Politicians, on the other hand, need to regain our trust and what could be a more powerful case study than the reform of the NHS.
