OuchLABOUR chairman Hazel Blears today faces a twin attack over her support for maternity services in her Salford constituency. In a scathing letter, former health boss Dr Ian Greatorex branded her actions `unprincipled'. He claimed the MP had used the NHS as a tool to further her political career. Dr Greatorex, retired chief of Salford and Trafford Health Authority, claims that in 1998 Ms Blears failed to back a plan to transfer Trafford General's paediatric department to Hope Hospital in Salford and says she welcomed the fact the then Health Secretary personally intervened to stop the move.
Dr Greatorex says this blighted children's health services in Salford for years - and she was now protesting about a situation `she helped to bring about'. Ms Blears' decision to join mothers and midwifes to protest against the closure of Hope's maternity unit provoked a storm last month. Critics claimed she was cynically abandoning her own government's national health policy when it came to reforms that affected her own constituency. There were also claims that her support for the maternity unit was a blatant bid to improve her chances of beating Eccles Labour MP Ian Stewart in a selection battle later this month... The M.E.N. has seen a letter to Ms Blears from Dr Greatorex, retired chief executive of Salford and Trafford Health Authority, who is a supporter of Hope.
In the letter, he launches a scathing attack. He claims Ms Blears, who is also his local MP, has been inconsistent with her support of Hope. Dr Greatorex writes that in 1998, as a newly elected MP, she failed to back a health authority's proposal that Trafford General's paediatric in-patient department should close and be transferred to Hope. At the time, Health Secretary Frank Dobson intervened to stop the move - and Ms Blears welcomed it. Dr Greatorex says in his letter that the decision blighted children's health services in Salford for years and adds: "Your unprincipled intervention in 1998 helped to bring about the unfortunate situation in which we now find ourselves. In my view, you and your government have treated the local health service as a tool in furtherance of your own political careers, which explains why you now protest about a situation which you helped to bring about."Dr Greatorex told the M.E.N: "She gave a promise then that children's services would be developed at Hope. Nine years later, they have not been. I feel badly let down by my MP."
political commentator * author * publisher * bookseller * radio presenter * blogger * Conservative candidate * former lobbyist * Jack Russell owner * West Ham United fanatic * Email iain AT iaindale DOT com
Thursday, January 11, 2007
Hazel Blears Stands Accused
From the Manchester Evening News...
Whilst I'm not familiar with the politics of Greater Manchester's health services, are we to understand that Our Little Chipmunk is being chastised by Dr Greaterox (sp? Can't remember his name) for intervening in the closure of a service at a Manchester hospital?
ReplyDeleteI think I'm missing something here.
I doubt Blears'll be that hurt by this. An alternative spin on this is that she's currently resisting the closure of one maternity unit, and nine years ago she resisted the closure of a paediatric unit at a different hospital.
ReplyDeleteI'm just guessing but I bet there was a "save Trafford paediatric" campaign and lots of happy local voters when it was left open. While Greatorex may have wanted to develop Hope at the expense of other units (and it may even have been sensible), I would expect the local electorate had a rather different view - people seem to get very protective of their local hospital.
So basically, Greatorex has just reminded local voters that Blears has been consistent in her support for keeping local services open (at least when electorally convenient).
Apparently, she's still hoping that her hypocrisy over the NHS won't affect her chances of becoming deputy leader.
ReplyDeleteChipmunk. No.
ReplyDeleteWhited sepulchre. Matt. 23:27
Every thing this Government touches turns to cr*p. I can put this down to 2 things.
ReplyDelete(1) The senior Labour politicians are just cr*p executives. They come across as poor middle managers who spent their early years selling socialist-worker or boycotting banks rather than learning about how complex organisations work.
(2) They spend too much time trying to win votes. Hype turns to expectation management, turns to spin, turns to denial, turns to lies. They should spend more time in their job.
I suppose the first problem is endemic in Labour politicians - they are just a protest party. The second problem should be solved by ensuring that each cabinet Minister has a paid stand-in constituency MP to do their constituency work for them.
We're back to the 1970's - same out come different reasons. Rats are on the street, not because of bin-men striking but less bin-men. Social strife, not because of socialism but human rights. Hospitals shut down - not because of nurses striking but poor budget management.
A collapsing state apparently gives off the same bad smells.
The only thing that has improved with Labour is their ablity to lie and stay in office longer.
off thread Iain, Professor Congdon's decision to defect to UKIP
ReplyDeleteare you a sad
b glad
c don't care.
This is a general trend - senior public servants can see two things:
ReplyDelete1) Labour isn't working ( we could have told them that.)
2) There's no need to be afraid of retaliation as they won't be in power much longer.
So all the rubbish and spin they used to get away with when people thought they would be in power for ever doesn't work any more.
I wonder if Ray Mears has a recipe for Chipmunk roasted over an open fire ?
If Blears had really had any nous or clout, as a former chairman of the local Community Health Council she would have ensured that not just Traffords paediatric inpatients but also the NW regional speciality chirdren's hospital (Booth Hall and Pendlebury replacement) was installed at Hope Hospital, salford, rather than St Marys, Manchester. Then there would have been no chance at all of the maternity service leaving Hope.
ReplyDeleteWhen it comes to real nitty-gritty, Blears is worse than useless.
Off subject but just noticed that dave is supported by 71% of computer owning members who visit the ConHome site.
ReplyDeleteHazel Blears being unprincipled and inconsistent ? You'll be telling us next that dogs bark !
ReplyDeleteGood story all the same.
"You'll be telling us next that dogs bark"
ReplyDeletemore an interminable high-pitched whimper - exactly what you'd expect from a Blair poodle.
Iain - come on! - pull your socks up! I thought you were a fan of Haze?
ReplyDeleteDr G - in 1997 was arguing for concentration of services at one hospital at the expense of another. Now in 2007 he is against the same process because in both cases of the way this affects his local hospital. There's surely a kind of twisted reverse-NIMBY-ism going on - IMBY-OIB - In My Back Yard Or I Bleat.
Haze and, my guess though Dr G has said otherwise, Bev supported the status quo on the merits of the arguments at the time. I don't suppose either of them had any inkling then that their positions on saving local services then would lead to or be connected with any threat to local services 10 years later. Dr G comes across like a green-inker not a coherent thinker.
Now Haze - who generally backs the idea (which is always going to be a hard sell) of concentrating services - is campaigning against a change that affects her constituents.
That is as it should be, surely?
Dr G was I think a better citizen when he was in a politically restricted post and couldn't so easily foam at the mouth in the media.
Is he perchance politically affiliated?
The MEN needless to say are gulls and were unwittingly pulled into John Leech's cancer hoax in 2005 but have now thought better of that.