In my opinion, it was a very silly idea with very silly rationale, conducted by a very silly boy, blinded by ambition.
Yes, the NHS needs to change, evolve, keep up, modernise, innovate, but it requires evidence, preparation, experience, engagement and an understanding of how a complicated organisation actually works.
Streeting announced the abolition of NHS England, enormous reductions in management capacity and another upheaval of the organisations responsible for commissioning and coordinating care at precisely the time when the NHS needed stability, relentless attention to waiting lists, a serious programme of operational improvement and social care stabilised.
No legitimate arguments were made for removing duplication between NHS England and the DH, which insiders tell me was principally duplication in the Department of Health because ministers felt outside the loop of the NHS England.
Where was the convincing implementation planned? What risks were identified? Who challenged the assumptions? What benefits have materialised? By the time the government published an impact assessment, the damage was underway and doesn't settle the question of whether the decision was properly tested before it was announced.
Any hospital chief executive attempting to reorganise on this scale would expect forensic scrutiny from their board.
Indeed, any hospital boss wanting to change the location of a service would have to write an outline business case, a business case, and get it signed off.
And let's not forget a futile attempt at the at the leadership of Labour, pretending he had support and plainly he didn't.
In my opinion, it was a very silly idea with very silly rationale, conducted by a very silly boy, blinded by ambition.
Yes, the NHS needs to change, evolve, keep up, modernise, innovate, but it requires evidence, preparation, experience, engagement and an understanding of how a complicated organisation actually works.
Streeting announced the abolition of NHS England, enormous reductions in management capacity and another upheaval of the organisations responsible for commissioning and coordinating care at precisely the time when the NHS needed stability, relentless attention to waiting lists, a serious programme of operational improvement and social care stabilised.
No legitimate arguments were made for removing duplication between NHS England and the DH, which insiders tell me was principally duplication in the Department of Health because ministers felt outside the loop of the NHS England.
Where was the convincing implementation planned? What risks were identified? Who challenged the assumptions? What benefits have materialised? By the time the government published an impact assessment, the damage was underway and doesn't settle the question of whether the decision was properly tested before it was announced.
Any hospital chief executive attempting to reorganise on this scale would expect forensic scrutiny from their board.
Indeed, any hospital boss wanting to change the location of a service would have to write an outline business case, a business case, and get it signed off.
And let's not forget a futile attempt at the at the leadership of Labour, pretending he had support and plainly he didn't.
The rest of this transcript — segmented and speaker-labeled, so you land on the exact moment something was said
Search every transcript — by keyword, by phrase, or by meaning, across every show Radar indexes
Trends — what is surging across podcasts, measured against its own baseline
Alerts — when a name you follow appears in a newly indexed episode
No account is needed to search Radar.
