Southampton Labour Is Ashamed of Its Failures

Over the last four years since they made the promises that they didn't keep, Southampton Labour have been increasingly ashamed of their failures to protect the vulnerable.

What Jeremy Corbyn claims Labour does ("Labour is standing up for your community") is far from the reality of what Southampton Labour has done on Southampton City Council.

It's no wonder very respected election expert Prof John Curtice is predicting a very poor Labour performance, including the loss of control of Southampton on May 5th. They only have a majority of 2 (25 Labour 20 Conservatives 3 Independents).

This is because Labour has not PROTECTED but ATTACKED your community with inappropriate developments and cuts!

Labour are still trying to blame others like the Tories - who also failed when they were in power from 2008-2012.

But Labour has chosen the wrong priorities, wasted millions due to their serial incompetence and has seen a revolving door of failure at Southampton City Council.

All the while they claimed that they didn't have the money to keep services and do the Millbrook and Maybush Regeneration, despite wasting millions on the Arts Complex - and now Labour Leader Councillor Simon Letts wants to borrow £65 million - after cutting all these services and claiming there is no money/blaming the Tories for the umpteenth time!

It's an outrage - but it's typical Labour incompetence. How many Labour Governments have left our country in a financial mess? And now Labour wants to risk YOUR money on so-called "investment". As they say on TV, investments can go down as well as up - this is taxpayers' money - YOUR money!

And what of Redbridge ward - has your Redbridge Labour Councillor Lee Whitbread protected the vulnerable? No.

Even though he is seeking your vote, Lee Whitbread (have you even heard of him before now?) and the Labour Council have failed to protect YOU, your family and your area.

Lee Whitbread voted:

• to cut YOUR lollipop men and women
• to cut YOUR Sure Start services
• to cut YOUR library and bus passes
• to close Woodside Lodge and Brownhill House care centres

Labour uses weasel words and deception to deny the truth.

But the truth is there on public record in the agenda and minutes of the Council.

Or perhaps Labour councillors didn't even know what they were doing when they were voting these cuts through? Did they read the budget? Did they read the reports to Council? Did the Cabinet sneak the cuts through?

It doesn't matter - the facts are there. They voted for more and more cuts.

The truth is that there is no real difference between Labour and the Tories - they both have cut YOUR services.

Lee Whitbread hasn't properly represented you. He didn't stand up for YOU to have your say at the Regeneration public meeting. He has failed to defend your area from inappropriate developments.

Vote for Independent Denise Wyatt to replace him.

Protect Our Green Spaces!

Below is the original version of a letter printed in the Daily Echo from Independent Council Candidate for Redbridge, Denise Wyatt:

"Labour can't be trusted with green space at the Sports Centre. How do I know this?

Residents of Millbrook, Maybush and Redbridge know that the Labour Council are selling off green space at Test Lane for more monstrous warehousing like the dreadful Lidl development.

Sports clubs and residents have have told me that they fear the future of the playing fields and the future of children's green space. 

The regeneration of Millbrook, Maybush,and Redbridge has put all green space at risk!"

Independent Councillor for Redbridge, Andrew Pope, added:

"Residents have seen the Lidl monstrosity be built, against residents' wishes. And they are now suffering traffic chaos because of the poor planning and lack of leadership from the Labour Council.

Residents are very unhappy that Labour councillors voted through even more warehouses at Test Lane.

And residents are extremely unhappy at Labour's 4-year failure to 'regenerate' the area. They showed their anger at the recent public meeting - a meeting that I had to fight hard to make happen, against the wishes of Labour councillors like Cathie McEwing who told residents at the meeting that they were not "interested".

The only way to protect our green spaces is to Vote Independent for Denise Wyatt at the 2016 local elections on 5th May."

Southern Health Still Haven't Changed

Over the past few months, I and Denise Wyatt have continued our pressure on Southern Health following their proven failures of leadership and to care for our loved ones.

At Southampton City Council, we were appalled how the Health Scrutiny Panel of councillors let Southern Health off the hook. Not only that, the Chair of the Panel, Labour Councillor Sarah Bogle did not insist as we had asked that SH Chief Exec Katrina Percy and SH Chair Mike Petter attend. Instead, she let Ms Percy go on leave and send two other directors to attend. Worse, when I challenged her on this in a written question to Full Council, she appeared to try to justify this. In another conversation, it appeared to Denise and I that Cllr Bogle was just too busy to make Southern Health accountable.

Worse, the papers sent to the Panel were wrong, giving a false impression of progress to "learn the lessons" they claim to have learned. Such claims are bitterly disputed by fellow campaigners, highlighted again by new analysis published today by the Justice for LB campaign. Why were the papers wrong? It was just an error say SH. Obviously not deliberate.

So the Health Scrutiny Panel failed to do its job - why was it left to Denise and I as campaigners to read the papers and know they were wrong? It is the job of officers and members of the Scrutiny Panel to be aware. But they didn't do their job.

And as already stated on this blog, the governors and directors of SH have failed. This includes Labour Peartree Councillor Paul Lewzey who was the governor appointed by outgoing Freemantle Labour Councillor David Shields to represent Southampton's residents. The latter is the one who thought it was OK to try to gag the rest of us councillors. As the Daily Echo reported, it may work on Labour or Tory councillors but not on Independents like myself and Coxford Independent Don Thomas.

As for Governor Paul Lewzey, after waiting a long time for his answer to my question as to why he didn't back Governor John Green's proposal for an independent investigation into SH, all we got was a rambling non-answer. Towing the party line instead of proper accountability for failed governance and failed care is not on.

The regulators have also failed. Months after Mazars, the regulators are dragging their heals - will their threats in this week's media amount to anything? It is difficult to be confident of this given past experience.

So how do we hold the NHS to account? The answer is that we can't.

And sadly this is the inevitable consequence of how the NHS was set up in 1948. It cannot be top-down command and control. That is for Stalinists.

It has to be local, but with real, not imagined accountability.

In the meantime, campaigners have to use all forms of media and whatever other tools they can, to get rid of the failures of the existing system.

Join us!

Independent Councillor Andrew Pope

Updated: STILL opposed to Test Lane development

Independent Council Candidate for Redbridge Denise Wyatt and Independent Councillor Andrew Pope are once again attending Southampton City Council's Planning Panel this evening. It is a public meeting.

Denise Wyatt's views are communicated on today's Daily Echo front page and page 7 here. Denise and Andrew are on the left of the photo holding the placards "Air Quality not Labour ££££" and "Green Space not Labour ££££". This was at a protest on Gover Road, opposite the proposed site.

A couple of photos of the printed version are attached to this blog post article.

UPDATE: Here is a letter to the Echo from local resident Roy Sanders.

At the last public meeting, Cllr Pope wanted the full details to come back to the Panel so that residents and he as their representative could make their views known. This was agreed. But now members of the Panel and officers of the Council have moved to stifle public involvement.

We have been speaking to residents that will suffer if this application is given the final go-ahead tonight.

And they are not happy.

And we have seen an email from one of the members of the Panel, Councillor Nigel Hecks, who thinks the public should not be allowed to speak!

Test LaneHecks, Nigel (Cllr)Sent:   11 April 2016 13:50To:Denness, Mike (Cllr)Cc:Tucker, Matthew (Cllr); Coombs, Hannah (Cllr); Wilkinson, Graham (Cllr); ; ; Pope, Andrew (Cllr)
Chairman,
I have carefully considered the various emails from residents and Cllr Pope requesting withdrawal/ deferment of this item.  I have no doubt that, I'm the light of the excellent report by officers,  the item should proceed as usual and that there should be no public speaking on the matter. The panel has all necessary information to take the decision and any further delay is neither warranted nor in the public interest.Kind regards,Nigel Hecks (Cllr)

This is the same councillor who wasn't even there at the October meeting! He was replaced by another councillor (new Conservative councillor Alex Houghton). And Councillor Hecks attacks democracy in this way! Do the people in his ward (Sholing) also think their views shouldn't be listened to? 

Does he think his views are more important than the public's? 

His views are unconventional. They are also wrong. He believes that Solent University is not a "real" university like Southampton University. His snobbery comes across in his attack on the free speech of Redbridge residents.

This Council and councillors like Cllr Hecks do not want to listen to the public.

The Labour Council just wants the money from the sale of the land. The Labour councillors have voted to spend the money from the sale of land in our City, including the Redbridge ward councillors that want your vote on 5th May. Other Labour members of the Panel have also voted to spend public money that comes from the sale of land.

So not only do Labour but seemingly Conservatives too want more warehouses like the Lidl monstrosity which local residents HATE.

They also want to continue the attack on OUR GREEN SPACES.

Tell them NO! tonight at the Civic Centre at 6pm.

Tell them NO! in your postal vote or at the polling stations, 7am to 10pm Thursday 5th May.

VOTE INDEPENDENT to tell them NO!

Denise Wyatt - Your Redbridge Independent Council Candidate

Denise Wyatt Your Independent Council Candidate listens to YOU.

You told her Labour's Regeneration ignored you. Denise spoke up for you to have your say at the public meeting at All Saints Church. Independent councillors speak up for you instead of doing what their party tells them to like Labour, Tory and UKIP.

Denise fought for you against Labour Council cuts at Windermere Avenue Sure Start, Labour Council cuts to Millbrook Library, Labour and Tory plans to cut disabled and pensioner bus passes and Labour closure of Woodside Lodge and Brownhill House care centres.

Denise fought for more parking and fought against and changed bad developments like the Test Lane monstrosities and the Council in-filling of our green spaces and parks.

Denise says:

"I have and will put the people of Redbridge first because as an Independent I can! As Independent councillors do in Redbridge and Coxford, I focus on representing my local community – NOT jumping to political party instruction!"

Vote Denise Wyatt on Thursday 5th May - or in your postal vote!


Vote for Independents!

Vote Denise Wyatt - Independent Council Candidate for Redbridge

Southern Health - Conspiracy or Cock-up?

Last night, Denise Wyatt and I attended Southampton's Extraordinary Meeting on Southern Health - which the Daily Echo did a "pre-piece" for here.

We were attending as campaigners to reform the NHS, and on behalf of Southampton's families that have suffered at the hands of Southern Health.

Once we had waited for what seemed like an age*, both Denise and I asked questions of Chris Gordon, Chief Operating Officer of Southern Health and Lesley Stevens, Medical Director.

*(yes, like Southern Health's meetings, the "public" had to wait to hear from Southern Health, various other NHS people trying to justify their own existence, and questions from councillors on the Panel).

Other members of the public, and other councillors, were there but did not ask questions.

There were some useful questions from councillors on the Panel. But they should have been tougher on Southern Health, and the Chair Councillor Sarah Bogle was not ensuring that questions were being properly answered.

For example, soon-to-be-retiring Councillor Matt Tucker asked them how many members of the Board were still those who were on the Board during the time that the Mazars report was written for (2011-2015). Ms Stevens and Mr Gordon managed to avoid answering that question when put by Cllr Tucker.

So when I got my chance (the Chair limited my time, although I could have asked questions for at least an hour), I asked this question again. At first, the Southern Health directors claimed that they did not understand what was a very clear question. After much to'ing and fro'ing, I had established that Ms Stevens had been with the Trust, and that the current Chair Mr Petter has been on the Board. And that the current Chief Executive Ms Percy had always been the Chief Executive. It was clear that the directors did not know, or want to say, the number of Board members that were still on the Board.

I was aiming at showing the lack of accountability of those who should be accountable. With so many NHS people around the table, it is difficult to know who is accountable for the crisis at Southern Health. Perhaps they all are - commissioners, quangocrats, directors. With so much fragmentation, accountability is a smudge, not a clear line.

But who is responsible must be determined - and sanctions applied. This is in the power of the Council of Governors - who have fluffed it. It is also in the power of the Trust Board and regulators, who have fluffed it.

And that is why an independent investigation - independent of the NHS, is needed. Otherwise those who are responsible could be perceived to have an interest in covering up their failures. This includes regulators Monitor and the Care Quality Commission (after all, regulators have failed elsewhere including at Mid-Staffs).

And on that note, as Denise pointed out (her eagle eyes spotted this omission), the Panel was not presented with the full facts on how Southern Health was reforming itself. Only half of the infamous spreadsheet "Mortality and SIRI Improvement" that went to the Trust Board in January, went to the Panel (it wasn't provided at all to the Council of Governors).

Why was the information missing on evidence that the reform that Southern Health directors claim was happening - was actually happening? Why was a more rosy picture being painted than is realistic?

Even the normally meek and mild Southern Health Non-Executive Directors challenged the information presented to the Trust Board. Those who were at that meeting, including the bus of Justice for LB campaigners from Oxfordshire, asked why the targets were not more ambitious and why "Action Progress" entries were Amber rather than Red (e.g. Risk of Slippage). This is deaths that are being tallied here, not widgets or B & Q - deaths!!!!!

But this information was missing from the 200+ pages given to Southampton's Emergency meeting.

I have asked Southern Health' Communications Officer for confirmation of what information was provided to the Panel, and whether any of the directors interfered or approved with what was sent.

Conspiracy or cock-up? Let me know which you think it is?

I also asked Southampton City Council 's Appointed Governor Councillor Paul Lewzey why he voted against an independent investigation into Southern Health at the recent Council of Governors meeting (proposed by John Green). He failed to give an answer. Denise also pointed out that he had voted this down during her questions. Cllr Lewzey has asked me to send him an email. It will be interesting to hear his reasoning.

Southern Health Governors Must Go

There must be an investigation into the failures at Southern Health but it must be independent of the NHS, which has a vested interest in covering up. The CQC and Monitor are not independent. They are part of a failed system - a point which Southern Health Governor John Green has made very clear in his heroic work.

Southern Health Governor John Green

Unlike the other governors, he has put huge time and effort as a volunteer into trying to make things right, as reported by the Daily Echo this week.

But the other governors just don't get it - and it's time for them to go! 

They must not forget - as campaigner Denise Wyatt reminded them at the Council of Governors meeting in early January - governors are there to protect us and our loved ones. 

Why do I say this? For several weeks since we became aware of Southern Health's problems, governance expert Denise and I have been providing advice in good faith to Southern Health, its Company Secretary, Chair and Governors.

We wanted to patiently, in good faith and good grace, try to work with these people to improve the future for the patients, carers and families of Southern Health.

As part of this advice, Denise and I wrote a paper to advise Governors how to fulfill their role properly in holding the Trust Board to account. At our request, it was confirmed by the Company Secretary that this paper had been sent to all Governors. Only 2 governors (of 26) contacted us to thank us for our help, which we provided for free and in our own time.

How could it be then that when Governor John Green put his three constructive and relatively mild recommendations to this week's Council of Governors, that two governors - Helen Keats and Liz Hall - could question whether it was the Governors place to question the leadership of Southern Health? Denise and I were incredulous at such ignorance of the facts, and called out that "It's your job!" - leading to the Chair Mike Petter (also under pressure from the BBC for a conflict of interest) threatening to expel us from the meeting.

Did they read our advice? Did they ignore it? Did they not understand it?

The advice we provided is crystal clear:

"Holding the Non-Executive Directors to Account

The Southern Health Constitution states the Council of Governors are:
18.1.1. To hold the Non-Executive Directors individually and collectively to account for the performance of the Board of Directors;

What does this mean?

 “Governors are responsible for appointing the chair and other non-executive directors and may also remove them in the event of unsatisfactory performance.” Quote from  Your statutory duties A reference guide for NHS foundation trust governors

In light of the Mazars Report, do you think there has been satisfactory performance?

If not, you must use the powers you have to ensure a satisfactory performance.

You have the powers – please use them !"

If the Governors did not understand our advice, they could have got clarification from us or the Company Secretary. Instead, they ignored it and carried on their ignorance and failing to do their public duty and use the powers they have.

Added to these failures, the Trust Board and Council of Governors tried to explain their way out of the questions I put to both of these Foundation Trust bodies back in mid-December. Despite waiting for a month, I was disappointed that they did not properly answer the questions. Not only this, but they did not pursue the crucial points of the questions...

...that I had requested an investigation using the Nominations and Appointments committees and the proper use of the Governors powers to hold the leadership to account.

John Green was the only one who got it. Every single other governor present (apart from one abstention), including appointed governors Councillor Paul Lewzey (Southampton City Council), and Councillor Andrew Joy (Hampshire County Council) voted against his recommendations to independently investigate.

We were aghast at their negligence.

As the Mazars report states, Southern Health have failed to investigate deaths in a timely or accurate way. But at these meetings, people like Mike Petter and Dr Chris Gordon continue to maintain that the Mazars report did not criticise the care by Southern Health.

If you fail to investigate deaths, that surely shows a lack of commitment to quality of care?

This state of denial by the leadership of Southern Health has to stop. 

So can the other SH governors and the current SH leadership do it? No - we've given them a chance but they have blown it. This week's meeting was the final straw.

I have previously blogged that I wanted to give the governors a chance to prove that they could do it. I believed that there was a nucleus of governors that Denise and I could work with. But the Governors' rejection of John Green's recommendations for an independent investigation show that they have no wish to fulfill their statutory duties. My hopes have been dashed.

Anybody who voted against Mr Green's proposals is not fit to be a Governor. They seem to prefer to smooth things over rather than address the problems. They are not fit to represent me as a Southampton resident, nor anybody from across Hampshire and the other counties that Southern Health "look after".

So how are they to be removed?

Elections for the Council of Governors were only held last year. Several governors came to the end of their appointed times this week. And three more governors resigned before this week's meeting, leaving more holes in the proper governance of Southern Health.

Apart from John Green, who seems to be the only governor who understands his duties, every single one of them should resign or immediately receive urgent training to properly fulfill their public duties. I know that new governors are not being given adequate training, because I have asked them - but if they had any gumption, they should be demanding it. Time has run out. It's time for them to go.

If they do not resign, they must be removed by the public in new elections, or by the Secretary of State Jeremy Hunt.

Perhaps then the public will have governors who will do their duty and hold the leadership of Southern Health to account.

And then we can reform the governance of NHS Foundation Trusts so that they are truly accountable to local people.

UPDATED: Upping the Pressure on Southern Health

Update: There will be an Extraordinary Meeting of the Southampton Health Scrutiny Panel a week today on February 1st at 6.30pm in Committee Room 3 at the Civic Centre. The latest information I have is that Dr Chris Gordon and Lesley Stevens of the Southern Health Board will be answering questions from councillors and the public. More details are on the City Council website here.

---

Having attended the very poorly-run Council of Governors meeting, I was hopeful that the Emergency Trust Board meeting of directors last Monday would be an improvement.

Sadly, I was as equally if not more, disappointed. Equally sadly, I was not surprised.

Once again, following the second request from me in as many meetings, the Chair Mike Petter REFUSED to bring forward questions from the public to be at the beginning of the agenda. As was shown on the BBC South Today report, I believe it is disrespectful to expect members of the public - who the Trust Board are meant to serve - to have to sit through hours of meetings before having their say. 

Many local authorities including Southampton bring items of public interest to the beginning of public meetings.

That is common courtesy.

But not Mike Petter. Although I asked him on camera*! He refused my request and "that's the end of the matter", he said.

It is even more disrespectful to press on with the Trust Board meeting when members of families who have suffered at the hands of Southern Health, and other patients, are at the meeting.

The meeting was packed because we the public showed up to express our anger.

And it is incredible that the Trust Board made decisions without listening to the public first, and the public's representatives - the Council of Governors, first.

The Chair continues to treat the public, and their elected representatives, the Council of Governors, with contempt.

He has a conflict of interest as Chair in resolving the crisis, because he has been part of the Trust for several years. The Chair should be removed by the Council of Governors, who have this power. Instead, when given the opportunity at the Council of Governors meeting to express in public their dismay with his performance, only one spoke up - the pompous Tory Councillor Andrew Joy, who expressed his confidence in Mr Petter. He may live to regret that support.

It is clear that large sections of both the Council of Governors and Trust Board are still in denial about the crisis that Southern Health faces. As I've said before, there are a nucleus of people who want to fix the malaise. But as it stands, they are outnumbered by those who are either in denial, or who lack the ability or motivation to act.

So I have now made the following request to the councillors who are Chairs of Southampton City Council's Overview and Scrutiny Management Committee, and Health Overview and Scrutiny Panel:

Dear Chairs of OSMC and HOSP,

I request that given:

1. the dire situations faced by my constituents and those across our City, who have suffered and may continue to suffer at the hands of Southern Health NHS Foundation Trust unless urgent action is taken, and 

2. the state of denial that was still clearly evident at both Emergency meetings that I attended in January 2016 of the Council of Governors and the Trust Board at Southern Health, including by statements made by the Chief Executive and Chair, and

3. that Monitor has stated that it will appoint an Improvement Director, and 

4. that Southampton City Council and other health bodies in Southampton commission services by Southern Health

that an emergency joint meeting is held of OSMC and HOSP to request that the Chair and Chief Executive attend to ask questions by members of both Panels, other councillors such as myself and by the Public.

I very much hope that they agree to my request. And I hope that members of the public attend the meeting.

If the Council of Governors who are supposed to hold the Trust Board to account don't want to or cannot do so, it must be up to the rest of us to do it.

All the best,

Andrew

*(interesting that there was no secret ballot at the Trust Board on recording of meetings - unlike at the recent Council of Governors - who decided this?). Perhaps my repeated requests had finally hit home?

A Future Predicted but not Prevented

Having attended Tuesday's Extraordinary Council Meeting of Governors, BBC journalist Michael Buchanan expressed his frustration, describing the meeting as "desperate".

He was not alone. 

I and other members of the public like Denise Wyatt were visibly angry as can be seen in the ITV Meridian and Daily Echo reports. Perish the thoughts of the families of loved ones affected by the neglect of Southern Health.

But are such farcical meetings of governors and governance unique to Southern Health as a foundation trust?

No, but the crisis engulfing Southern Health amplifies the flaws in governance that I highlighted in my research five years ago. That research is still relevant today.

Perhaps I am at fault for not publishing it more widely at the time, or being too trusting with the Quality Accounts published by NHS trusts in the South over the past few years.

Now with the benefit of hindsight and from the publicity generated by campaigners like Justice for LB, Richard West and Ian Penfold (it shouldn't have to have been exposed this way) we know Southern Health were stretching the truth - if not flat out lying!

When it came to presenting their Quality Accounts to my (much later) successors on the Southampton Health Overview and Scrutiny Panel in early 2015, the Southern Health documents were not ready - sounds sadly like the lateness of their investigations into unexpected deaths!

And the timeliness, accuracy and relevance of information presented to that Committee are questionable - just as it has been for the Council of Governors.

With such a large organisation as the NHS, it is impossible for one person to check the figures of all the trusts. Isn't that what the many regulators like the CQC and Monitor are for? Are they failing too?

Advice I have received from academics over the past few years was that the problems I highlighted in the FT research were well-known. So why hadn't research like mine been done before?

As well as being predicted, the problems at Southern Health and doubtless other foundation trusts have not been prevented. Why? The answers are in the research, and I will run through those another time.

But when I was going back through my research this week, it was almost like I had predicted the future - this was not difficult as the research showed the problems were already occurring in the present...

... so whenever I've had the opportunity: whether chairing the Southampton Health Overview and Scrutiny Panel, campaigning against privatisation of the NHS, or doing research and presentations on governance, I've pointed out the flaws in the governance of NHS foundation trusts.

Successive governments may have tinkered with the governance structures. But they have not removed the many flaws.

Those flaws in governance don't exist in abstract form.

They are very real. And they've changed lives - not necessarily for the better and in some cases very much for the worse. 

Governors are not responsible for day-to-day operation of the health trusts they are supposed to oversee and scrutinise. That is the job of the executive directors and staff. Governors have powers, even if these powers are not all they need to be. Where they don't have powers, they need to "use their noodle" or rather, use influence better.

That is to say, the flaws in governance have to be removed, but in the meantime they must be worked around, if governors are to properly fulfill their roles.

There are many well-intentioned people who are governors. But the good intentions of these volunteers have to be supported by the NHS to be better governors (e.g. proper training and timely information). It shouldn't be left to the public or outsiders to do it for them. 

We have done it, as volunteers, for free. But it shouldn't have to be this way.

Whilst there is an encouraging nucleus, it is clear from this week's meetings, from discussions with governors, and analysis of the minutes of previous meetings, that there are not yet enough governors at Southern Health that are performing the role fully.

This week, following us pointing out some of these flaws at the meeting and in our questions to governors, Denise and I wrote some advice that has been forwarded to all Southern Health governors. We've already received a constructive response from one of the governors, and hope to continue the dialogue.

We very much hope that our advice is listened and acted upon by all governors, and leads to better accountability of:

• the Chair
• the Trust Board collectively and 
• both executive and non-executive directors individually

for the dire crisis of care and management of care at Southern Health.

And that our advice will help governors to better fulfill their duties to avoid future crises at Southern Health and elsewhere in the NHS.

But if our advice is ignored or not acted upon, then we reserve our rights to campaign to remove those governors.