Toon by Silvis Rivers Of The Clan De Rivers
Probably the most interesting thing happening in so called "monitoring" of health (what's left of health monitoring) is what the National Association For Local Involvement Network Members state in their response/report as a Local Authority conflict of interest to the usual DOH sludgey new "HealthWatch" tactics of screwing up public accountability in lay health monitoring terms at the behest of politicians claiming to make things "local" as opposed to "Top-Down".
But the new "localism" is already "Top-Down" because seasoned local authority watchers and bureau-spotters know that the game of the new lay "HealthWatch" control is on, and the new Health and Well Being Boards were already planned by Labour and will be shaped up functionally only slightly differently from Labour ambitions of power control with weakened lay monitor criticism of policy roll-outs because polticians underlyingly hate democracy and prefer elective dictatorship ...
Powerelessness is their trade, and without it their power dwindles - they know it ....
NALM says the following in its report of the proposals to replace Local Involvement Networks with "HealthWatch"
"4. The Independence of Local and National HealthWatch
There is a critical and glaring conflict of interests in local authorities deciding levels of funding for the body responsible for scrutinising their social care services.
Under the present legislation, LINks appear to be accountable to the Secretary of State for Health and have a membership to whom they are also accountable. This arrangement appears to confer a high degree of independence, but in some instances, LINk members have felt their independence compromised by local authorities and by Hosts. Some LINks have reported threats to their funding and actual reductions, where the LINk has resisted pressure to comply with the direction dictated by local authorities or Hosts. The three-way arrangement (LINks, local authority and Host), has not been a great success in some cases, and some LINks members would argue it has been a failure and not in the best interests of the public or the best use of public funds."
UserWatch partly agrees with NALM's insights here . What's now different in local Govt too is the recessionary context - screw the poor and cut more services . Lick ass of the the favoured banker classes telling everyone they need bonuses of billions to secure the "talent" they need for their businesses .. What fucking talent ? Talent for major losses ? Huh ? Fuck off please ..
So you know what to expect - a weakened structure of health monitoring in the new HealthWatch dominated by Local Authorities who will be funding the HealthWatch bodies that monitor their services ....
Ahh what perfect " localism"....
What is the answer ? Don't believe in this crap but find a ledge of independence anywhere you can for a view and notch your Apache arrows and pierce the contradictions ...... Let em bleed .. Because you definitely will .
But the new "localism" is already "Top-Down" because seasoned local authority watchers and bureau-spotters know that the game of the new lay "HealthWatch" control is on, and the new Health and Well Being Boards were already planned by Labour and will be shaped up functionally only slightly differently from Labour ambitions of power control with weakened lay monitor criticism of policy roll-outs because polticians underlyingly hate democracy and prefer elective dictatorship ...
Powerelessness is their trade, and without it their power dwindles - they know it ....
NALM says the following in its report of the proposals to replace Local Involvement Networks with "HealthWatch"
"4. The Independence of Local and National HealthWatch
There is a critical and glaring conflict of interests in local authorities deciding levels of funding for the body responsible for scrutinising their social care services.
Under the present legislation, LINks appear to be accountable to the Secretary of State for Health and have a membership to whom they are also accountable. This arrangement appears to confer a high degree of independence, but in some instances, LINk members have felt their independence compromised by local authorities and by Hosts. Some LINks have reported threats to their funding and actual reductions, where the LINk has resisted pressure to comply with the direction dictated by local authorities or Hosts. The three-way arrangement (LINks, local authority and Host), has not been a great success in some cases, and some LINks members would argue it has been a failure and not in the best interests of the public or the best use of public funds."
UserWatch partly agrees with NALM's insights here . What's now different in local Govt too is the recessionary context - screw the poor and cut more services . Lick ass of the the favoured banker classes telling everyone they need bonuses of billions to secure the "talent" they need for their businesses .. What fucking talent ? Talent for major losses ? Huh ? Fuck off please ..
So you know what to expect - a weakened structure of health monitoring in the new HealthWatch dominated by Local Authorities who will be funding the HealthWatch bodies that monitor their services ....
Ahh what perfect " localism"....
What is the answer ? Don't believe in this crap but find a ledge of independence anywhere you can for a view and notch your Apache arrows and pierce the contradictions ...... Let em bleed .. Because you definitely will .
.jpg)
No comments:
Post a Comment