On the whole, National Voices welcomes the proposed amendments to the content of the NHS Constitution.
However, there are a number of ways that the amendments could be strengthening further, to provide greater clarity in relation to key agendas upon which the Government has already expressed its support at policy level.
We are calling for:
National Voices members told the NHS Future Forum in 2011, during the ‘pause’ in the Health and Social Care Bill, that we wanted a ‘new deal for people with long term conditions’ based on getting the right care in the right place at the right time.
We stated that patients and service users should be supported to:
On behalf of the above members of the recently established NHS Voluntary Sector Providers Forum (VSPF), I am pleased to be able to respond to Monitor’sConsultation on the Substantive guidance on the Procurement, Patient Choice and Competition Regulations.
Our response focuses on a number of key points:
Patients, service users, their carers and families want care services which are safe, which do not breach standards and which are effectively monitored, inspected and regulated.
As Berwick’s recent report makes clear, service user involvement is indivisible from and indispensible to patient safety. Moreover, safety is not the only aspect of care services which is important to service users. There are longstanding demands for better coordinated, more personalised services which support service user involvement, empowerment and control.
This response is submitted by National Voices and was coordinated by National Voices’ member, the African Health Policy Network.
The main points of this response can be summarised as:
National Voices has a concern about the process being used to revise the Mandate. We suggest that reviews of the Mandate should build on the BBC Charter model. That is, strategic objectives should be developed and mutually agreed between the government and the arm’s length/independent agency prior to consultation and refinement.
National Voices welcomes some of the new ambitions expressed in the government’s consultation document, but questions whether it is appropriate at this point to drop so many new or revised objectives into the new commissioning system.
Overall, National Voices welcomes the recognition of the need for a more joined up approach for older people with health and social care needs. We would, however, like to question the decision to limit the scope to those with more than one diagnosed long term condition. We believe that this goes against the Government’s intended focus on wellbeing and prevention (e.g. Clauses 1 and 2 of the Care Bill – as recognised under 3.4.1 of the draft scope) and commitment to more person-centred approaches that can support earlier identification and better management of risk factors (e.g.
The purpose of regulation is to ensure high quality care, treatment and support for people who use services. These draft regulations muddle the legal definition of quality in a way that is not helpful.
There must be clear reference to the involvement of, and respect for, people who are carers, family members and/or representatives of the person who uses the service.
Despite the government’s intentions, outcomes relating to the full involvement of people who use services are not adequately reflected in the draft regulations.