Dear Keep Our
NHS Public supporter,
You probably saw this news from before the August bank holiday
weekend about how Derbyshire pensioner Pam Smith and her community
managed to scupper a deal to hand over a GP surgery to UnitedHealth,
America's biggest healthcare corporation (see press release
below). Keep Our NHS Public has backed this campaign since
it began.
This is an important example of how victories can be won,
no matter how relentless the privatisation drive appears to
be. The court case established the scope of the powers contained
in Section 11 of the Health and Social Care Act, 2001. This
requires NHS organisations to involve and consult service
users and potential service users either directly or through
representatives in the planning, development and operation
of services. The Derbyshire appeal judgement recognised that
under section 11, PCTs etc are legally required not just to
inform patients of what they're doing but to build local concerns
and wishes into the whole process. The same judgement would
apply to ISTCs and other areas. See more legal information
at http://www.keepournhspublic.com/whatyoucando.php
These are important powers for local campaigners which can
provide a focus for opposition to privatisation. True, the
PCT can consult and then ignore the wishes of the community,
but at least this provides an opportunity to raise the profile
of issues which are too often decided behind closed doors.
So, please, take inspiration from Pam Smith and be on the
look out for opportunities to use the consultation rights
which she has established!
PENSIONER WINS GP PRIVATISATION BATTLE AT COURT OF
APPEAL
Pam Smith has won her appeal to prevent a US healthcare corporation
from running a GP surgery in Derbyshire. Lord Justices Keene
and May quashed the selection of United Health Europe – the
British arm of America’s biggest healthcare corporation –
to run the practice, and ordered North Eastern Derbyshire
primary care trust to start the tendering process from scratch.
They also awarded Pam Smith 100 per cent of the costs.
The decision is a stunning victory for a pensioner who dared
to stand up to the might of the government, the NHS and a
multi-national corporation. It is a blow for the government’s
reform programme of bringing in private companies to run GP
services, and may discourage other private companies from
involvement in the scheme.
The case provides a precedent for other communities facing
similar situations. It has established that patients have
a legal right to be involved and consulted on plans for changes.
In a number of other cases, communities have been opposed
to the notion of profit-making companies running their family
doctor surgeries.
Pam Smith said: “This just shows what people power can do.
It was a real case of David and Goliath. I feel like I’m on
a high. I would love to be a fly on Patricia Hewitt’s wall
now – she keeps saying patients have a choice; well we’ve
made our choice. United Health would only have taken profits.
We will keep our NHS public, not private – that’s what makes
Britain unique.”
Alex Nunns of Keep Our NHS Public said: “This is a complete
and total victory, and a vindication for Pam and her community,
who have tirelessly fought against their GP surgery being
handed over to a giant American corporation. It is also a
model for other communities having this forced on them in
the government’s drive to privatise the NHS. Thanks to Pam,
they now have a clear legal right to be heard.
“People are rightly suspicious of profit-making companies
taking over their family doctor surgeries. They fear that
the standard of care will decline, and that shareholders will
be put before patients. If ‘patient choice’ is to mean anything
at all, the NHS must listen to these concerns, and stop imposing
the private sector on unwilling communities.”
NOTES:
1. North-Eastern Derbyshire Primary Care Trust chose UnitedHealth
Europe as its ‘preferred bidder’ to run the Creswell Primary
Care Centre in December last year. It provoked uproar among
the local community – especially in the village of Langwith,
which has a branch of the Creswell centre – who accused the
PCT of privatising their GP service against their wishes.
At a judicial review in June, a judge ruled that the PCT did
have an obligation to consult the community, meaning it had
acted unlawfully. However, he ruled against Pam Smith on the
technicality that she should have taken an “alternative remedy”
before bringing a judicial review. In recognition of that
fact that “on the main issues she was successful,” the judge
awarded Smith 75% of the costs.
2. Upon winning the appeal, Pam Smith was awarded 100% of
the costs of both hearings. The judges found that the alternative
remedy of the patients’ forum was not appropriate since is
it not in a position to judge law and has no real power over
the PCT. The appeal court judges also ruled that the original
judge, Mr Justice Collins, was wrong to say that the selection
of United Health would have been the same even if the PCT
had consulted.
3. The Court of Appeal has quashed the selection of UnitedHealth
Europe and ordered the tender to be reopened. The PCT is required
to involve and consult the local community on its plans. This
has serious implications for government policy. January’s
health white paper set out plans to open up primary care to
the market by encouraging private companies to run GP surgeries
and allowing them control of commissioning budgets. But in
a number of areas the policy has met opposition from patients.
4. The Department of Health viewed the case so seriously it
intervened in the proceedings, arguing against its own rhetoric
of patient choice that there was no need to consult the community.
|