A financial therapist named Ravid Freud once said :
"If you dream of a five legged creature dancing awkwardly with a pirate bandana on and one gonad dangling - you'll know its a U.K. Quangling dancing the fandango quango tango - or something like that .. And its big mouth will be eating money greedily .. And no it does not like bananas and apples ... It eats paper, uses lots of paper, and even excretes paper out ... Its also known as Raper-paper beast .. To experts of course...
And the people who have to clean it up eventually are called Civil Pervants .. Yet the cost of this extra paper dancing is very high indeed .. No wonder the Amazon forests are dwindling with all that extra pulping going on to feed the dancing Quangling"
QUASI AUTONOMOUS NON GOVERNMENTAL ORGANISATION = QUANGO
"Brown's quango infatuation costs taxpayer £46.5bn - Willott Thursday, 04, Feb 2010 12:00 Today, the Government published new figures showing that the annual cost of running quangos has risen to £46.5bn – a rise of nearly £10bn since Gordon Brown became Prime Minister. "
Source: politics.co.uk
But what does the Health Service Journal say : (subscription only)
"Spending on quangos such as Monitor and the Health Protection Agency has increased by almost £10bn under Gordon Brown, the Cabinet Office revealed yesterday"
By 2008 it was revealed that the UK version of NIMHE - National Institute of Mental Health had cost over £100 million and it has now morphed into another body known as the National Mental Health Development Unit (NMHDU) whose job it is to capture mental health stats across the country. A rumour suggested it had a £40 million budget. Who knows exactly? Well maybe when the Freedom of Information material comes back we'll know .. Another offshoot of NIMHE known as the Care Services Improvement Partnership CSIP has probably cost 40 million.
There has been some evidence the NMHDU is funding (like NIMHE once did) a selective elite of fitter mental health Users become careerists known as the National Service Users Network (NSUN) for some work . Users when asked in parts of the UK are not sure how many real members it has, as opposed to its front end claim of being "National" and connected at set up , more to other charity heads .
What is clear is it has used up £750k of a grant 500 k from Comic Relief and 250k from another Foundation . What for, is difficult to grasp . Perhaps it will get in touch and account for itself ?
It was helped by a figure from the Mental Health Foundation known as David Crepaz Keay who once worked for Mental Health Media and left there suddenly in 2005 . Perhaps he can get in touch with a lot of detail and leave it here about the audit trail of all this
In the past it appears in mental health there has been quite a lot of inside influencing occurring at Government level on advisory boards with the construction of bodies like NIMHE - the truth about this has been shadowy though. A freedom of information request to the DOH in 2005 took 3 years to process and finally showed that named "advisors" on the SHIFT board ( a DOH/NIMHE body dealing with mental health anti stigma) were often ex charity or charity heads or charity officers .
The Dept of Health had resisted giving their names . Some of these have morphed from one position of advantage to another and the two large mental health charities partly involved, MIND and Rethink went onto to capture £20 million in grants, for work that relatively few of the public appear to even know about much or even care about .
Has this Charity coalition been an aid to mental health patients or could Patient Choice of (non acute) recovery treatments in the localities in involving market supply sides of recovery help and support, have been implemented sooner without them ? Why was Patient Choice in mental heath skewed ?
MIND itself is now a supplier of CBT in part of the UK . Is all this coalition dancing healthy and did it seriously represent the national mental health patient interest ?
The big question remains as to why Central Gov't felt it had to had to dominate the localities so much, suck them dry of soul, and spend so much money on administration, dubious cross organisational QUANGO projects and social engineering. The truth is people in localities wanted productive lives and direct help for that, not parasitic bureaucracies and their thinking, without real health choices in their lives .
Its clear in mental health that Labour themselves created an impoverished mechanism too of serious patient "choice" in the shape of means tested Direct Payment benefits for mental health Users with social care needs locked impossibly into local council payment control and in Birmingham UK in 2010 with a population of over 1 million there is only approximately 35 mental health Users on them ! That has taken several years to grow, in 2005 there was 1 MH User in Direct Payments to help them obtain social care for their needs .
Yet Central Gov't wasted huge amounts of money on central driven projects influenced by networks that are still operating through the mental health charities and leftover quangoes . Whatever Government comes into power in 2010 beyond the election in the UK, it needs to unleash local power and re-balance it so that network Londonism and the social engineering cliques of centralising network power there cannot suck money their way and give little for it to local peoples - apart from of course, a lot of energy sapping bureaucracy ..
And the people who have to clean it up eventually are called Civil Pervants .. Yet the cost of this extra paper dancing is very high indeed .. No wonder the Amazon forests are dwindling with all that extra pulping going on to feed the dancing Quangling"
QUASI AUTONOMOUS NON GOVERNMENTAL ORGANISATION = QUANGO
"Brown's quango infatuation costs taxpayer £46.5bn - Willott Thursday, 04, Feb 2010 12:00 Today, the Government published new figures showing that the annual cost of running quangos has risen to £46.5bn – a rise of nearly £10bn since Gordon Brown became Prime Minister. "
Source: politics.co.uk
But what does the Health Service Journal say : (subscription only)
"Spending on quangos such as Monitor and the Health Protection Agency has increased by almost £10bn under Gordon Brown, the Cabinet Office revealed yesterday"
By 2008 it was revealed that the UK version of NIMHE - National Institute of Mental Health had cost over £100 million and it has now morphed into another body known as the National Mental Health Development Unit (NMHDU) whose job it is to capture mental health stats across the country. A rumour suggested it had a £40 million budget. Who knows exactly? Well maybe when the Freedom of Information material comes back we'll know .. Another offshoot of NIMHE known as the Care Services Improvement Partnership CSIP has probably cost 40 million.
There has been some evidence the NMHDU is funding (like NIMHE once did) a selective elite of fitter mental health Users become careerists known as the National Service Users Network (NSUN) for some work . Users when asked in parts of the UK are not sure how many real members it has, as opposed to its front end claim of being "National" and connected at set up , more to other charity heads .
What is clear is it has used up £750k of a grant 500 k from Comic Relief and 250k from another Foundation . What for, is difficult to grasp . Perhaps it will get in touch and account for itself ?
It was helped by a figure from the Mental Health Foundation known as David Crepaz Keay who once worked for Mental Health Media and left there suddenly in 2005 . Perhaps he can get in touch with a lot of detail and leave it here about the audit trail of all this
In the past it appears in mental health there has been quite a lot of inside influencing occurring at Government level on advisory boards with the construction of bodies like NIMHE - the truth about this has been shadowy though. A freedom of information request to the DOH in 2005 took 3 years to process and finally showed that named "advisors" on the SHIFT board ( a DOH/NIMHE body dealing with mental health anti stigma) were often ex charity or charity heads or charity officers .
The Dept of Health had resisted giving their names . Some of these have morphed from one position of advantage to another and the two large mental health charities partly involved, MIND and Rethink went onto to capture £20 million in grants, for work that relatively few of the public appear to even know about much or even care about .
Has this Charity coalition been an aid to mental health patients or could Patient Choice of (non acute) recovery treatments in the localities in involving market supply sides of recovery help and support, have been implemented sooner without them ? Why was Patient Choice in mental heath skewed ?
MIND itself is now a supplier of CBT in part of the UK . Is all this coalition dancing healthy and did it seriously represent the national mental health patient interest ?
The big question remains as to why Central Gov't felt it had to had to dominate the localities so much, suck them dry of soul, and spend so much money on administration, dubious cross organisational QUANGO projects and social engineering. The truth is people in localities wanted productive lives and direct help for that, not parasitic bureaucracies and their thinking, without real health choices in their lives .
Its clear in mental health that Labour themselves created an impoverished mechanism too of serious patient "choice" in the shape of means tested Direct Payment benefits for mental health Users with social care needs locked impossibly into local council payment control and in Birmingham UK in 2010 with a population of over 1 million there is only approximately 35 mental health Users on them ! That has taken several years to grow, in 2005 there was 1 MH User in Direct Payments to help them obtain social care for their needs .
Yet Central Gov't wasted huge amounts of money on central driven projects influenced by networks that are still operating through the mental health charities and leftover quangoes . Whatever Government comes into power in 2010 beyond the election in the UK, it needs to unleash local power and re-balance it so that network Londonism and the social engineering cliques of centralising network power there cannot suck money their way and give little for it to local peoples - apart from of course, a lot of energy sapping bureaucracy ..
.jpg)
No comments:
Post a Comment