Report to the People
7th June 2004
Clinical
Strategy
NHS
Argyll and Clyde’s plan, as outlined in its recently published Clinical
Strategy, to cram most of
those in need of emergency or inpatient services into a hospital which is
already struggling to cope with its current numbers – the full-to-bursting RAH
– is, at best, dubious.
It
fails, amongst other things, to grasp the serious concerns over access for
patients and their families, over safety in emergency situations and over
increased waiting times.
Not surprisingly, the idea
has been greeted with outrage in our community.
There is, however, more to
this very hard and brutally honest document.
Having read its 55 pages in detail, it
doesn’t pull its punches when it comes to outlining the scale of the challenge
facing the NHS in Argyll & Clyde and throughout Scotland.
There
might be record levels of funding going into the NHS, but even this, as the
strategy spells out, has not stopped the new shorter working hours for doctors,
the difficulties general hospitals experience when competing with university-led
services in Glasgow to recruit clinicians and new contracts for medical staff
putting on the squeeze.
The
fact is that, as things stand, even if we recruited every single school leaver
in Scotland with the right grades to study medicine, we would still not have
enough doctors to maintain the status quo.
So
we are being forced to meet some stiff challenges – with that much I agree.
I also agree that, yes, we do need to modernise elderly care and mental
health services. Yes, the strategy
is right to call for the introduction of one-stop clinics and more flexible
opening hours for healthcare facilities. And
yes, it is right to make better use of technology.
But
what is totally wrong is the one club golfers’ approach: seeing more
centralisation as the only way to deal with the pressures on the NHS.
I disagree vehemently with this.
So
what do we do?
We
could, like some, throw our hands up in the air and have a good old wail. But,
while this might make us feel better, it is not particularly constructive.
What
we need are credible alternatives, which we can put in front of the Board and
for which we can argue. Working
with trade union representatives, consultants, GPs and others, we should be able
to formulate a proposal aimed at maximising local access to services and
maintaining local employment levels.
The first preparatory steps
towards this are already being made.
Back to Current Reports to the People
[ HOME ] [ News ] [ Report to the People ] [ Interact ] [ Links ] [ E-Mail ]
[ Copyright ] [ UK Online ] [ Scottish Parliament ]