Streeting says pay guidelines for NHS chiefs to be modified so they’re linked to efficiency, with ‘no extra rewards for failure’
Wes Streeting, the well being secretary, has introduced that pay preparations for NHS belief chief executives can be modified so they’re linked to efficiency.
Commenting on the announcement, which is because of be confirmed in a speech later this week, Streeting mentioned:
I’m ready to pay for the perfect and I’ll defend monetary incentives to draw and preserve proficient individuals within the NHS. It’s an enormous organisation that must be competing with world companies for the perfect expertise.
However there can be no extra rewards for failure. We have now bought to get a grip on runaway spending and ensure each penny going to the NHS advantages affected person – modifications won’t be in style but it surely’s a case of reform or die.
The change will have an effect on VSMs (very senior managers), like belief chief executives.
Explaining how pay can be linked to efficiency, the Division of Well being and Social Care mentioned in a news release:
In his assessment of the NHS, Lord Ara Darzi discovered the one standards by which chief govt pay was set is the turnover of the organisation. Neither the timeliness of entry, high quality of care or efficient working of the organisation factored into pay. NHS built-in care techniques had constructed up deficits totalling £2bn in simply the primary 4 months of this monetary 12 months, leaving the incoming authorities with a monetary blackhole which needed to be handled on the finances.
A brand new pay framework for VSMs will due to this fact be revealed earlier than April 2025. This can clamp down on poor efficiency, whereas rewarding senior leaders who’re efficiently turning their companies round.
Key occasions
Afternoon abstract
-
Wes Streeting, the well being secretary, has mentioned that pay preparations for NHS belief chief executives can be modified so they’re linked to efficiency. There can be “no extra rewards for failure”, he mentioned. (See 5.24pm.)
Streeting says pay guidelines for NHS chiefs to be modified so they’re linked to efficiency, with ‘no extra rewards for failure’
Wes Streeting, the well being secretary, has introduced that pay preparations for NHS belief chief executives can be modified so they’re linked to efficiency.
Commenting on the announcement, which is because of be confirmed in a speech later this week, Streeting mentioned:
I’m ready to pay for the perfect and I’ll defend monetary incentives to draw and preserve proficient individuals within the NHS. It’s an enormous organisation that must be competing with world companies for the perfect expertise.
However there can be no extra rewards for failure. We have now bought to get a grip on runaway spending and ensure each penny going to the NHS advantages affected person – modifications won’t be in style but it surely’s a case of reform or die.
The change will have an effect on VSMs (very senior managers), like belief chief executives.
Explaining how pay can be linked to efficiency, the Division of Well being and Social Care mentioned in a news release:
In his assessment of the NHS, Lord Ara Darzi discovered the one standards by which chief govt pay was set is the turnover of the organisation. Neither the timeliness of entry, high quality of care or efficient working of the organisation factored into pay. NHS built-in care techniques had constructed up deficits totalling £2bn in simply the primary 4 months of this monetary 12 months, leaving the incoming authorities with a monetary blackhole which needed to be handled on the finances.
A brand new pay framework for VSMs will due to this fact be revealed earlier than April 2025. This can clamp down on poor efficiency, whereas rewarding senior leaders who’re efficiently turning their companies round.
Ready lists could be decrease if authorities had agreed NHS request for 10,000 additional hospital beds, Covid inquiry hears
Hospital ready lists could be decrease if the federal government had given the well being service permission to develop the variety of hospital beds in the course of the Covid pandemic, Amanda Pritchard, the NHS chief govt, has steered.
As PA Media stories, in July 2020 the NHS sought 10,000 “non-temporary” hospital beds to take care of restoration from the primary wave of the disaster and the longer term surges in case numbers. However the request was refused by the Treasury, headed on the time by Rishi Sunak, and by Downing Avenue, the place Boris Johnson was PM.
Giving proof to the Covid inquiry Pritchard mentioned that the choice was “disappointing” and that the nation “may very well be in a unique place” in terms of the backlog of pre-planned hospital care.
In line with the newest knowledge from NHS England, an estimated 7.64 million therapies have been ready to be carried out on the finish of August, relating to six.42 million sufferers.
Questioning Pritchard, counsel to the inquiry Jacqueline Carey KC, mentioned:
In July of 2020, NHS England sought 10,000 non-temporary beds to take care of restoration and the potential future surges … the funding for these beds was not authorized by Her Majesty’s Treasury.
And Pritchard replied:
We had performed some modelling work over that summer season to taking a look at from a greatest estimate, what it could take to have the ability to run with a type of fixed variety of sufferers within the service who have been Covid optimistic, create the mandatory headroom then to reply to regular winter pressures, however crucially additionally to have the house to do the, not simply pressing, but additionally non-urgent, non-Covid work, in order that we’d have the ability to try this restoration work that we’d begun to start out in the summertime.
Carey mentioned:
I feel the prime minister’s personal workplace was concerned within the choice to refuse and mentioned, successfully, they wished extra use to be manufactured from Nightingales [emergency temporary hospitals], the impartial sector, to return to discharging sufferers if vital, utilizing flu vaccinations to hopefully take care of any flu upsurge there could be, and that there could be capability checked out within the spending assessment … What have been the results of that 10,000 mattress requests being refused, out of your perspective?
And Pritchard replied:
It was, as you say, very disappointing, as a result of what it meant in apply is that the place we might now be in, I feel, a really completely different place on elective restoration.
If we had had that capability, we might actually have handled hundreds extra sufferers if we had had that extra headroom, in addition to being extra resilient going into the second wave and into winter extra typically.
So subsequent to the pandemic, there have been some steps taken to extend core mattress capability, however clearly we might have performed with that capability on the time, and I feel we’d be in a fairly completely different place now.
Healey says Tories’ pre-election proposal to boost defence spending to 2.5% of GDP simply unfunded ‘political ploy’
James Cartlidge, the shadow defence secretary, has criticised the federal government for not saying when it is going to get defence spending as much as 2.5% of GDP.
In a Commons pressing query, Cartlidge mentioned Labour has dedicated to outlining a pathway to spending 2.5% of GDP on defence, however mentioned ministers have been “unable” to say whether or not they would ship on the goal within the present parliament. (See 10.15am.) He went on:
2.5% just isn’t an finish in itself, the important thing cause in April [why] we set out a totally funded, multi-year pathway to 2.5% was to allow the MoD to acquire at tempo and at scale the munitions we have to urgently replenish our shares to war-fighting ranges.
With the entire world wanting to purchase extra munitions, we can not afford to delay any additional.
Healey mentioned the final authorities’s proposal to boost defence spending to 2.5% of GDP was not a plan, however only a “political ploy”. He mentioned:
It was introduced 4 weeks earlier than they then known as the overall election. It was unfunded, it was a con on the armed forces and on the British individuals who gave their reply emphatically by sweeping away Tory MPs in lots of the proudest army communities and constituencies throughout the nation.
Throughout the UQ Healey additionally repeated the purpose he made in his interviews this morning about how, if Donald Trump has urged Russia to keep away from escalation in Ukraine, that could be a optimistic improvement. (See 8.59am.) Healey mentioned that was a “superb first step”.
The Kremlin has since claimed that the decision between Trump and Vladimir Putin, as reported within the Washington Publish, by no means came about.
Sinn Féin’s Michelle O’Neill says being branded traitor for attending Remembrance Sunday ceremony ‘troublesome’
Michelle O’Neill, the Sinn Féin first minister of Northern Eire, has mentioned it has been “troublesome to listen to” fellow republicans criticise her participation within the Remembrance Sunday ceremony at Belfast Metropolis Corridor.
As PA Media stories, O’Neill’s feedback got here after a banner with the phrase “Traitors” on it was erected at her constituency workplace in Cookstown, Co Tyrone, on the weekend.
Republican activists in Cookstown, Tyrone have made the anger of the Republican Group on the newest act of treachery by Michelle O’Neill and the Sinn Féin management clear by hanging a banner on her workplace pic.twitter.com/1U9VXd0Wcg
— Anti Imperialist Motion Eire (@AIAIreland) November 10, 2024
O’Neill broke new floor for her get together by attending the occasion commemorating fallen members of the UK armed forces on the Cenotaph in Belfast, the place she laid a laurel wreath. Nonetheless, she has confronted criticism from some individuals within the republican and nationalist group. As PA stories, greater than 100 family members of IRA members and civilians killed by the safety forces and loyalists throughout the Troubles signed a public assertion, published in the Irish News, expressing “devastation” at her choice to attend.
Requested in regards to the assertion from republicans criticising her, O’Neill advised a press convention this morning:
In fact, it’s troublesome to listen to that, notably from individuals who I do know all of my life, however I additionally completely settle for that they’re entitled to really feel how they really feel, notably in the event that they’ve misplaced a beloved one.
So I settle for and perceive precisely the place persons are coming from.
Nonetheless, I can’t be distracted from the position that I play. I need to drive our society ahead. I need to construct a shared future. I need to take as many individuals with us on that journey as we probably can, however I’ve dedicated to being a primary minister for all, and I’ll reside as much as that at each flip.
Requested if it was troublesome to be known as a traitor, O’Neill mentioned:
Look, persons are entitled to precise their view, and I can settle for the place they’re coming from, however I even have a task to play, and I’m decided to maintain driving us ahead.
And right here is an extract from the statement signed by republicans.
It’s past perception that any so-called Tyrone republican would want to lay a wreath in honour of those forces who brought on mayhem and homicide on hamlets, hills, villages, and cities – the killing grounds of Tyrone the place the cries for reality and justice about collusion, state homicide, and counterinsurgency hang-out your entire county and a whole bunch of households.
Have you ever all completely misplaced the run of yourselves or is it actually energy at any value?
As a result of if you get to the top of wherever it’s you need to be you’ll have compromised a lot, you’ll be no completely different from the staters and Blueshirts that executed republicans and hounded those that held pricey to the phrases and sacrifices of Tone, Connolly, Pearse, Sands, and Hurson.
Sir Wyn Williams, the inquiry chair, asks a few sentence in Badenoch’s second witness assertion. Within the assertion Badenoch says:
The Publish Workplace, then again, is caught on this awkward midway home, the place it’s given solely sufficient to exist in a state of everlasting hunger.
Q: If the Publish Workplace goes to live on in a state like this, can it live on in any respect?
Badenoch says it may well stick with it like this, however she says that that might not be greatest for the Publish Workplace.
She says there are issues going unsuitable on either side.
She says she doesn’t suppose the Publish Workplace spent cash correctly on Horizon. That might jsutify the Treasury withholding cash. But when the Publish Workplace is at all times reliant on the Treasury, which additionally has to fund issues like well being and colleges, it is going to at all times lose out, she says.
Q: Is the Publish Workplace price saving?
Sure, says Badenoch.
The problem is to work out tips on how to fund it, she says. However she goes on:
Ought to we now have a Publish Workplace? Sure, I feel it’s a cultural establishment that’s completely important for us to maintain and I assist it wholeheartedly.
And that’s the top of her proof.
On the inquiry Kemi Badenoch is being questioned now by counsel representing among the victims of the scandal. Requested who will repair the equipment of presidency, whether it is damaged as Badenoch claims it’s, Badenoch says that she is in a “minority” in pondering this. She says she has been making this argument for a very long time, however the authorities doesn’t agree. The truth that she is chief of the opposition, not in authorities, suggests she just isn’t successful the argument, she says.
Badenoch says wanting much less authorities regulation not similar as being against rule of regulation
Beer asks Badenoch about this passage in her second witness statement.
Second, there may be a proof for why issues are sluggish in authorities. There’s a cautious, risk-averse tradition throughout the civil service, which is systemic and baked-in. It is a rational – and possibly inevitable – response to the huge array of statutory and public regulation calls for that regulate the method by which authorities makes selections, and displays the ever-present danger of presidency selections being judicially reviewed, undermined and unwound by the courts. The pure response to that’s to do a number of preparatory work to guarantee that all of the bases are coated to restrict the danger of one thing going unsuitable additional down the road. There may be additionally an comprehensible give attention to offering worth for cash when spending taxpayer cash (which clearly includes trade-offs). This emphasis on warning slows down decision-making. It’s not that civil servants are slow-going or lazy or don’t care – the risk-averse tradition is a pure response to the authorized calls for positioned on authorities. They’re required to spend so much of time contemplating the varied impacts, looking for and assessing varied representations, taking into consideration and weighing all related data, ensuring all attainable various choices have been considered, ensuring that your entire course of is evidenced and so forth. As I say, this has turn into a baked-in, systemic characteristic of the system. If we would like our authorities to make selections quicker, we have to scale back among the public regulation burden – and if we select not to take action, we should settle for that this has penalties for the pace and effectivity of presidency. Each time we create extra public regulation to carry authorities to account, it’s slower to ship for individuals. It is a actual subject throughout authorities, and must be confronted. So while it’s simple to think about that authorities might have clicked its fingers to get compensation out the door, that fails to recognise the systemic and cultural complexity of decision-making in authorities.
Q: Are you saying, if we would like authorities to make selections quicker, we now have to scale back the general public regulation burden?
Badenoch says she is saying that, each time you create regulation and demand accountability, you sluggish issues down.
Q: Are you saying the rule of regulation stands in the way in which of the supply of companies by authorities?
Badenoch says she just isn’t saying that. She goes on:
The burden of regulation just isn’t the rule of regulation.
You possibly can the rule of regulation with out an extreme burden of regulation, however in the event you preserve including increasingly guidelines that may sluggish issues down.
It doesn’t imply that you just don’t need the rule of regulation, however the rule of regulation has a goal, and that’s to create a good system which everyone has handled equally, and the place everybody can obtain justice.
When you preserve creating extra rules and folks aren’t getting justice, then one thing has gone unsuitable, and we should always have the ability to take a look at that with out assuming that it is a criticism of your entire system of the rule of regulation.
It signifies that we should always have the ability to take a look at how we will reform public regulation. The regulation just isn’t above criticism. We should always have the ability to say ‘Truly, this isn’t working, what can we do to enhance it’, slightly than what is going on now the place individuals say, ‘Oh, it’s the rule of regulation. We are able to’t contact it. Let’s not do something.’
Badenoch says reforming the Publish Workplace could be an enormous problem. She says individuals don’t need to work there due to the scrutiny they know they’ll face as a result of it’s a public organisation.
The French authorities has now issued its readout of what Keir Starmer and Emmanuel Macron mentioned after they met this morning in Paris. It’s fairly a bit longer than the UK model (see 1.28pm), however not essentially extra revealing.
Badenoch ‘disenchanted’ it took ITV drama to hurry up Publish Workplace payouts
Right here is Mark Sweney’s story from Kemi Badenoch’s proof to the inquiry this morning.
Q: Had been you conscious that Staunton was a robust supporter of the sub-postmaster govt administrators if you determined to sack him?
Badenoch mentioned she didn’t know that when she took the choice. However he mentioned that to her of their name, she says.
Beer reads out the passage from Badenoch’s first witness statement the place she explains the components that led to the choice to sack Henry Staunton. Badenoch mentioned:
On 24 January 2024, I acquired a written submission dated 23 January 2024 ready by UKGI and Departmental officers, wherein I used to be suggested of particular considerations in relation to Mr Staunton’s conduct and his suitability for workplace. The particular considerations recognized within the submission have been:
(1) That he had repeatedly tried to close down a whistleblowing investigation into his conduct.
(2) That he had engaged in aggressive, intimidating and disrespectful behaviour to different board members and members of the POL govt staff.
(3) That he confirmed continued poor understanding of the general public sector side of POL’s work and poor judgement.
(4) That he had disregarded correct governance processes as POL’s Chair, most lately by saying the appointment of a brand new Senior Impartial Director for POL with out following formal session with the Board, following Board processes or looking for shareholder approval as required.
(5) That he had failed to offer constructive assist to POL’s CEO.
Requested why she sacked him, Badenoch refers to her earlier level about being seen to do the precise factor. She says she didn’t need to give Staunton the possibility to resign as a result of she wished a transparent story about what occurred.
Beer reveals Badenoch the submission she acquired recommending Staunton must be sacked.
Badenoch says it is a good instance of what she meant when she mentioned earlier considerations have been raised by officers in a “vanilla” type. (See 2.30pm.) She says officers had previously raised considerations about Staunton along with her. However they’d not given her the complete particulars.
Badenoch says, within the civil service, officers usually give ministers a “vanilla model” of complaints about individuals. She says she prefers the “unvarnished” model.
Badenoch says, when she spoke to Henry Staunton, she had a extra sympathetic view of him than she does now (within the mild of the way in which he publicly attacked the way in which he was dismissed).
Right here is the full version of the transcript.
Beer is now studying out extracts from the transcript. The complete doc is here, now on the Publish Workplace inquiry’s web site.
That is the way it begins.
Beer turns to the converation the place Badenoch advised Staunton he was being sacked, in January this 12 months.
He says Badenoch didn’t have a transcript of this when she did her witness assertion. However the inquiry has now obtained a recording.
Badenoch says she didn’t know the decision was being recorded. She doesn’t know the way frequent it’s for a name like this to be recorded. It was most likely recorded so they might have an correct transcript.