"Do we trust the people or not?" (565)

To the Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union:
For Clarity - Attempt 565:

565) "Do we trust the people or not?"

Dear Mr Davis,

You said in the Commons last week,
"The eyes of the nation are on this chamber as we consider this Bill. For many years there's been a creeping sense in the country - and not just this country - that politicians say one thing and do another. We voted to give the people the chance to determine our future at a referendum; now we must honour our side of the agreement - to vote to deliver on the result. So really are we considering the very simple question - do we trust the people or not?" (David Davis: European Union - Notification of Withdrawal - Bill)

Many politicians are highly skilled at saying one thing and doing another. It's what they're good at. CCG executives seem to be catching on fast.

You need look no further than at the Prime Minister's exhortation to, "step up" to, "challenge vested interests" and to, "right wrongs" (all laudable intentions in themselves) only for her then to sheepishly hold Mr Tump's hand whilst being led up the garden path, to know to take what they say with a large pinch of salt.

This would suggest that the simple question politicians should be considering is not - do they trust the people or not - but why do the people still trust quite so many politicians?

Recent research suggests they don't.

According to an Ipsos MORI poll of 20th Jan 2016 politicians remain the profession least trusted by the British public, below estate agents, journalists and bankers. Doctors are the most trusted of professions. However, when the role of CCGs is more fully understood by the British public confidence in them is likely to be seriously undermined.

It is highly convenient for politicians to trust the people when they happen to agree with them - especially at the time of a referendum - but what about the rest of the time?

The people weren't sufficiently trusted to be told there was to be a Health and Social Care Act in the Conservative Party 2010 manifesto - or the privatisation that that would entail. 

Under, "Health" the Telegraph reported that the Conservative Party manifesto, "promises managerial reforms to make the service more efficient."  Crucially, "NHS staff will be properly accountable to patients." We're told that specific health policies included; "Putting more detailed NHS performance data online" and, "Putting patients in charge of their own records."
(www.telegraph.co.uk/news/elections-2010/7165000/conservative-manifesto)

Q. Mr Davis, if the NHS is to be properly accountable to patients why hasn't Professor Waite, CEO of Livewell Southwest Ltd, properly, promptly and fully answered our questions?
Q. Mr Davis, if the NHS is to be properly accountable to patients why does Professor Waite employ an Anonymous Desk Top Reviewer to deliver one-sentence unsubstantiated decisions which saddle his patients with hugely expensive bills for nursing care?
Q. Mr Davis, if putting more detailed NHS performance data online was a Conservative Party manifesto pledge why isn't each and every made by anonymous Livewell Southwest Ltd / NWE Devon CCG functionaries (and panel members) collated and put online?
Q. Mr Davis, if putting patients in charge of their own records was also a manifesto pledge why did I have to pay a Data Protection Act fee to access my late father's records and why was my name on my father's records?

Mr Davis, put your trust in the people and demand that the newly privatised NHS is made accountable. Then the people will see who in the NHS is making the decisions that have such a devastating impact upon their lives, if certain anonymous individuals are more prone to appalling decision making than others and if certain CCGs are more brutally efficient at passing the cost of care from the NHS onto their patients than others.

Clive Peedell, of the NHS Consultants Association found, "evidence that privatisation is an inevitable consequence of many of the policies contained in the health and Social Care Bill."
Q. Mr Davis, why didn't the Conservative Party manifesto trust the people at the time of the 2010 General Election to tell them they intended to further privatise the NHS and to ape America's disastrous healthcare system?

The Telegraph described these so-called reforms as, "The biggest revolution in the NHS since its foundations" yet they were not contained within the Conservative - Liberal Democrat coalition agreement of 20th May 2010 either.

Mr Davis, that's two political parties which had little or no trust in the people when it came to their - the people's - NHS.

Stephen Cragg of Doughty Street Chambers speaking for 38 Degrees said,
"Effectively, the duty to provide a national health service would be lost if the Bill became law." And, "CCGs are not open for discussion but are also already too far along the path to completion to be stopped now."

CCGs are not open for discussion.

This is supposed to be a democracy. One where politicians trust the people. Better instead for politicians to rig the market in health, "behind the scenes" and away from the glare of publicity.

Mr Davis isn't it true that we no longer have a national health service just scores of non-transparent unaccountable CCGs who are busily enriching their senior executives whilst rigging the market in healthcare?
Q. Mr Davis, shouldn't CCGs be known from now on as OCS - Organised Crime Syndicates?

CCGs refuse to trust the people. They refuse to comply with the people's Freedom of Information Act requests. They refuse to collect and publish data on their decisions regarding NHS funded nursing care and they refuse to trust the people with answers to their - the people's - questions.

They are the extortion racket at the very heart of the privatisation of the NHS.

Yours sincerely,
Steve Gilbert.