It's Codswallop from Downing Street

What a total farce of a day; this is the government of the UK picking winners and loosers for its dead-duck Health Bill.

Lansley is a chancer. He lacks intellect and capability. Bring in Jeremy Hunt...

End the Big 6 Energy Fix

We all know that the big six Energy companies have an effective oligopoly over the market and are pricing the poorest into the cold.

Since the Compass launch of the ‘End the Big Six Energy Fix’ campaign on Friday they have had over 5000 signatures – a fantastic start.

On its front page on Saturday The Independent revealed that the big six energy firms are due to make a £15bn windfall.

As someone who hasn’t yet signed they need your help in turning up the heat on the big six energy companies. Will you now sign the petition?

Today the true cost of energy profiteering really hit home, when it was revealed that deaths from hypothermia have doubled in the last five years.

And whilst millions of Britons struggle to make ends meet with 5.5m households in fuel poverty, the big six energy companies are struggling with a very different dilemma – what to do with all their windfall profits. Sound like a fair deal to you?

This is exactly why we want the Government to impose a levy on the big six energy companies to help insulate people’s homes and make their gas and electric bills more affordable. They’ve already imposed a levy on the North Sea oil companies – so why not the energy companies too?

They want to get to over 10,000 signatures by the end of this week, so that in the run-up to the Budget in March they can pile on the pressure for the Government to take action.

So sign the petition now and then share on Facebook, Twitter and email everyone you know:

Let’s work together to End the Big Six Energy Fix and try to ensure that next winter nobody has to be left in the cold.

Smile!

Unfortunately our MP ignored the advice of these campaigners and supported the Conservative NHS bill which will now see parts of our public NHS privatised.

No matter - under the boundary changes - Tracey is almost guaranteed a career for life. She is very likely to loose the Labour voting wards to neighbouring MPs and gain several solid blue wards from the weald of Kent.

Odd therefore it was Rehman who appeared on the Top 20 rising stars in the New Statesman recently.

If I were to put a wager down, Tracey is the one that is going places.

Credit where its due for meeting representatives of the opposition. Next time though; probably best to smile at the camera.

Stop Smoking Flashmob

Future health of Medway

It is quite common at the moment to listen to Tories waffle on about the Big Society and how anyone who volunteers for anything must be doing so under the grandiose title. It is of course total fiction.

I have volunteered for most of my adult life - from People & Planet and Fair Trade fashion parades at Durham University to getting involved in campaigning for a number of organisations. For my sins I was also briefly a Special Constable in the Police as well, alas all in a former life.

I support volunteerism and so do most rational and good spirited people.

The second problem with the concept of the Big Society is not only that it tries to politicise voluntary activity but it then starves it, in some cases by design, of resource.

So it is with much concern that this blogger has recently read the Medway Safeguarding Children's Board Annual Report, which is due incidently, to be discussed by the Council next week.

It is worth a read (though it is 100 pages) because it details the major health challenges of the future.

The Board is comprised of health, local authority and child care professionals who regularly meet to discuss the health outcomes for children and adults across Medway. It works with the state and voluntary sector.

Contained within the report are some major concerns in particularly deprived wards which currently have Labour representation such as, Chatham Central, Luton & Wayfield and Gillingham North:

To summarise the report

• Medway is deprived compared to the rest of the South East: 25 neighbourhoods in top 25% of nationally deprived areas.
• Medway has a higher level of child poverty than most similar local authorities (around 20%).
• High levels of smoking, obesity and poor diet.
• Life expectancy lower than average; at ward level the gap in life expectancy is 6.8 years.Teenage pregnancy levels remain high even though they have come down over the country as a whole. Particularly high in: Chatham Central, Luton & Wayfield, and Gillingham North.
• Gillingham North contains the highest number of people on housing benefit in Medway .
• Chatham Central, Luton & Wayfield, and Gillingham North are the wards with the lowest scores on the Child Wellbeing Index.

What is most concerning in the report however is that if you read between the lines the Board is waving a red flag about future funding. The implicit concern is clear; that the government cuts are driving even more responsibility for delivering services onto the voluntary sector, who are themselves starved of cash, and who potentially will not be able to deliver.

The results are therefore entirely predictable and also worrying for Medway which has some stubborn problems.

I have singled out two areas to highlight - Future investment in child care provision in Medway - where the report highlights increased pressure on children’s social care, where demand has risen 40-50% between 2008 and 2010 and where the budget for services is being cut by the Tories. Secondly, where Tory-led cuts to the Healthy Schools Programme, are pushing efforts to combat major social problems onto the voluntary sector. Meanwhole, Medway is one of the worst areas in the South East for childhood obesity and poor diet with 10% of children identified at reception age increasing to 20% of children being classed as obese by Year 6.

Next week the Children's Overview & Scrutiny Committee will discuss this report and the associated statistics for dealing with complaints in this sector. There is much food for thought here.

It deserves attention.

Nudge-ing in the right direction

The issue of public health and the place of government was finally resolved when Andrew Lansley yesterday spelled out his vision for government intervention.

This blogger was pleasantly surprised for the most part with its conclusions and recommendations. It does however have concerns about devolving of responsibility for such matters to local cash-strapped Councils.

Under Conservatives rules, Tobacco companies could be forced to put their cigarettes in plain packaging while sales of cut-price alcohol face a ban, health secretary Andrew Lansley confirmed.

His public health white paper offer a raft of proposals that range from the voluntary to "nudges" in the right direction to outright changes in the law.

His answer is to ring-fence spending on public health, which experts in the field have long wanted. Public health budgets have been raided in the past to pay for expensive hospital care. Directors of public health, based in local authorities, will have charge of the budgets and decide their local priorities and there will be incentive payments for reducing health inequalities, such as reducing the proportions of the poorest who smoke. A Health Inclusion Board is to be set up, which will probe the causes of deprivation and look at ways to tackle them.

Readers of this blog may remember the attacks from the Libertarian extremes for stating the government had a responsibility to be pro-active on public health. Many denied the existence of passive smoking, and even insisted it was a myth, and then continued to slam Medway students for highlighting in a campaign stunt the opposition to cigarettes.

This blog supported the students which caused anger from a number of extremist blogs who then subjected this blogger to a series of extremely nasty taunts in public (see comments). Seems like the last laugh is on the lunatic libertarians.

This blog suggested that there was an ideological argument from the right and left for pro-active prevention in health care. It cited the 'Nudge' book as a potential thesis to be followed. Interesting this is exactly what has happened.

One thing the coalition should be supported on wholeheartedly.

Thats Taking Liberties!

It seems that the loony Libertarian brigade are still banging on about the 'Ciggy busting' campaign by Hundred of Hoo Pupils a few weeks ago.

This blog was targeted by those on the loony Libertarian fringes along with fellow Medway Liberal Democrat Gary Allanach. We both disagreed on the legality of the event for our respective reasons

Indeed, the flurry of comments on both blogs can perhaps be attributed to the cross-linking by leading Libertarian Simon Clark, who has taken the odd comment out of context, and allowed a flurry of personal bile to remain beneath.

Nice bunch these libertarians!

The Council of course has been dealing with the copious quantities of paperwork over these complaints. One such response can be read on the popular Boiling Frog's blog:

Re: Formal Complaint – Rachael Noxon

I refer to your recent email about the Ciggybusters project.

We have checked with the organisers and all the people who had cigarettes taken off of them, and they were actors or willing participants. At no point did any smokers have their cigarettes taken without their permission.

This project, which looks at the dangers of smoking, was funded through a Community Chest grant by A Better Medway – a health campaign run by Medway Council and NHS Medway. Singling out the Tobacco Control Strategy Co-ordinator specifically as focus for your complaint is therefore inappropriate.

This project was something that was arranged and managed by the people that made the film, but neither Medway Council or NHS Medway would have condoned any activity that could cause offence.

The young people making the film, and the adults overseeing it, carefully stage-managed this to make sure that relevant organisations and participants were aware of the event in advance.

Everyone who took part knew what was happening and were not in any way offended. At no point were members of the public approached without their permission.

For these reasons I do not uphold your complaint.

Yours Sincerely

After receiving the letter it seems that Boiling Frog is closer to boiling point than the namesake blog suggests. The blog quickly retorts that Medway Council has not listened to the issue, and then goes onto cite supporting evidence from Liberal Democrat Councillor Gary Allanach.

Except, Boiling Frog has perhaps over boiled this one. Mr Allanach is not a Councillor. He is however a top 75 award winning Liberal Democrat blogger.

So there you go then. Totally legal and above board it would seem to all. Perhaps now our Hundred of Hoo pupils can return to Facebook without the snide remarks?

The one positive from all this.

With all these libertarians linking to this blog as well as Gary Allanach, it has surely now put its TotalPolitics rankings up from 98th!

Improving Health - Cut Smoking

Half of Medway's smokers will die from cancer, todays Medway Messenger has reported.

Despite the negativism and opportunism of libertarian and right wing bloggers, the local media has come out in support of this blog and government-backed and NHS campaigns to 'ciggy-bust' our way out of a cul-de-sac of health inequality.

According to the 277-page report, entitled Investing in Health, it shows that the chief killers in Medway will be lung, breast, bowel and prostate cancer. Alcoholism will also cause more deaths from the disease.

Individuals who live in Luton & Wayfield (the ward this blogger hopes to represent), Strood South and Twydall have a higher chance of being diagnosed with cancer, but incidents in the more affluent Rochester West ward are the lowest for Medway, says the report.

The report has highighted the success of previous programmes of government to reduce the levels of cancer by pro-active intervention. The rate in Medway remains significantly higher than elsewhere in south east England.

The report makes starkly clear that

"Fifty per cent of all current smokers are likely to be killed by their smoking habits"

The main causes of many illnesses are lifestyle excess; including smoking, obesity, alcohol and physical inactivity.

The report also has some interesting statistics on other health indicators including

- By 2030 more than half the population will be over 40, increasing the risk of diabetes which currently affects 12,583 residents. Though the number un-diagnosed may be signficantly higher.
- Tuberculosis affects an average of 19 people a year in Medway
- There are 8,033 people with coronary heart disease and 148 people with HIV

This report starkly highlights why health prevention and proactive government education programmes are very much necessary.

To simply put your head in the sand is deeply irresponsible. This report highlights starkly why campaigns like 'ciggy-busters' should be encouraged, where they are legal and awareness raising.

NHS Direct to be scrapped

Another promise broken Dave?

The health secretary, Andrew Lansley, has let slip that the government is planning to scrap NHS Direct, the hugely popular medical telephone helpline.

Chatham is one of the major centres for NHS Direct employing a large number of staff in its Quayside House in the Chatham Dockyard.

The Conservatives promised in the election not to re-organise the NHS but have since made a significant u-turn with expensive structural changes leading to cuts in services and medical headcount.

While touring Basingstoke and North Hampshire hospital on Thursday, Andrew Landsley revealed that the phone service – which this year cost £123m to run – is to be axed.

Until Lansley's apparent indiscretion, the official government line was that a new free telephone service, NHS 111, would not replace existing local telephone services or NHS Direct but might do so in the longer term if a pilot scheme is successful.

The Department of Health has confirmed that NHS 111 would replace NHS Direct within three years. The new service is undergoing trials in County Durham and Darlington.

"When NHS 111 is rolled out nationally, it will replace the NHS Direct 0845 4647 telephone number," the department said yesterday. People can dial 111 to get health advice and information about out-of-hours GPs, walk-in centres, emergency dentists and 24-hour chemists.

Although the new number is free, it is expected to be far cheaper to run than NHS Direct because it is likely to employ fewer medically trained staff. The department said it did not know how much NHS 111 would cost but admitted that it had a responsibility to save money.

"It is important that we deliver the best possible service for the public and, in the economic climate, deliver the best value for money," said a spokeswoman.

The NHS has been told to find up to £20bn of savings by 2014, even though the health service is due to see rises in its budget in the coming years.

According to the government, one way to cut costs is to hire cheaper staff. Forty per cent of NHS Direct's staff are trained nurses, but anyone dialling 111 will speak to non-specialist "call advisers" who have completed a 60-hour course rather than a degree.

The course, which is the same as that taken by 999 call operators, includes "specific education around anatomy, physiology and clinical features of injury and illness to enable them to provide a high-quality assessment of symptoms," said the health department spokeswoman. She added that difficult calls will be referred to a doctor or clinical supervisor.

Cuts to clinical staff in favour of non-medically trained people. A risky strategy which could harm patients.