Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement

 
 
Sunday, 20th July 2008

Premium Article !

Your account has been frozen. For your available options click the below button.

Options

Premium Article !

To read this article in full you must have registered and have a Premium Content Subscription with the The Scotsman site.

Subscribe

Registered Article !

To read this article in full you must be registered with the site.

Health chiefs slammed for £3m debt



Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 07 May 2008
MINISTERS have been urged to act to prevent any repeat of the fiasco that left a health board with more than £3 million of debt.
An investigation by the Scottish Parliament's audit committee, published yesterday, highlighted weak financial manage-ment at NHS Western Isles.

A former chief executive and chairman were singled out for criticism and the old Scottish health depar
tment was also blamed for contributing to and aggravating the situation, by failing to intervene sooner.

The report called for urgent action to resolve the "unacceptable" situation of the board having three chief executives, one suspended, one on secondment and one acting.

It urged Nicola Sturgeon, the health secretary, to consider carrying out a wider inquiry, a position backed by health unions.

Hugh Henry, the committee convener, said: "There is considerable anger and dismay, especially in the local community, regarding the failures in systems and management that have taken place within Western Isles Health Board over a number of years."

Ross Finnie, the Liberal Democrats' health spokesman, said: "The government must revisit how ministers and their civil servants monitor health board budgets. It's crucial that lessons are learned from this fiasco."

Ms Sturgeon has not ruled out a further inquiry, and said: "I will reflect on the audit committee report recommendation and take any further action I consider necessary."

The committee launched its investigation following a critical report from Robert Black, the Auditor General for Scotland, on the running of the board, which had run up a cumulative deficit of £3.36 million at the end of 2006-7.

The audit committee report said problems were "repeatedly raised in audit reports year after year without being resolved".

But it also said the Scottish Executive health department must bear part of the responsibility for the problems, as it had failed to grasp the significance of the problems early enough.

The report criticised Dick Manson, a former chief executive, and David Currie, a former chairman, who both left in 2006 after a task force was sent in by Andy Kerr, then health minister, amid accusations of mismanagement. Mr Currie resigned that day and Mr Manson was seconded to NHS National Services.

The report said they were "unconvincing witnesses" and that part of their evidence was "unsatisfactory and extremely unhelpful". It hinted action could be taken against Mr Manson.

The Unison union backed calls for a wider inquiry and said it hoped people would be held accountable for their actions.

John Angus MacKay, the board's current chairman, said it would take note of the report and take any necessary actions.

Mr Manson declined to comment, and the board said it could not comment on individuals.

Shades of Dr Finlay – as public money bled away

IT SERVES a small population and its £3 million debts are a drop in the ocean compared to the cost of Scotland's health service.

But the fiasco of NHS Western Isles has exposed flaws which raise questions over the management of Scotland's health boards and the spending of public cash.

Rapid changes in the NHS, heavy reliance on expensive consultants and a lack of adequate internal spending controls were among the factors blamed for the £3.364 million cumulative deficit faced by NHS Western Isles.

Yesterday's committee of MSPs recognised external cost pressures arising from the rapid implementation of changes in the NHS and in accounting practices reduced the financial flexibility previously available.

The board had also invested heavily in acute care services, with a high level of hospital provision and a big reliance on consultants. About £1 million was spent during 2003-4 on consultant locums in order to comply with the European Working Time Directive.

However, MSPs added: "The pressures that the board was under were exacerbated by serious weaknesses in the board's own internal control systems and financial management."

Their report said the lack of a fully costed clinical strategy hampered the ability of the board to manage its finances effectively. But it also points the finger at the then Scottish Executive health department for not ensuring the strategy was sustainable.

"The committee acknowledges that it is important for health boards to have effective control of their own affairs. However, where a board is clearly not performing, there should be a mechanism for the government to take swift action to resolve the situation."

One of the report's most damning criticisms is levelled at Dick Manson, the former chief executive, and David Currie, the former chairman. While they were in charge staff passed a vote of no confidence in them.

The audit committee said: "The committee is surprised that the former board chair and chief executive were unable to recall a crucial report which was made on the failures at the board.

"This was unsatisfactory, extremely unhelpful to the inquiry and leads the committee to regard their evidence as unconvincing."

It added: "The committee found Mr Manson and Mr Currie to be unconvincing witnesses in this respect."

In particular it called for an urgent resolution to the board's three chief executives. It was revealed in March that Mr Manson, who left the board in 2006, remains an employee and his salary is paid by the board.

However, it receives funds to cover his wages from NHS National Services Scotland, where he was seconded.

Laurence Irvine, who was suspended on full pay last September while an investigation is held into alleged CV discrepancies, is still being paid by the board. His interim replacement, John Turner, was seconded from the National Health Directorates, which is paying his wages.



The full article contains 925 words and appears in The Scotsman newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 07 May 2008 12:42 AM
  • Source: The Scotsman
  • Location: Edinburgh
  • Related Topics: Health of the NHS
 
1

Guga II,

Rockall 07/05/2008 02:23:05
"However, where a board is clearly not performing, there should be a mechanism for the government to take swift action to resolve the situation."

This is more or less what I've been saying in these posts for a few years now. When there is an ongoing shambles like this, the government should have the ability to throw the lot of them out on their ear, appoint an administrator, and hold elections for a new Board.

This, of course, brings up another important point. The majority of the Board members should be elected by the people. I am aware that there is a need for doctors or other health professionals to be on the board, but they should no longer be an appointed Quango that can, and does, ignore the public it allegedly serves. A majority of the members should be elected.

The current shambles speaks for itself when there are THREE chief executives, all being paid for by the taxpayer. This is also true of the shambles wherein it has taken nearly nine months to sort out the "discrepancies" in the CV of one of them, and there is no sign of it being sorted out for quite a while yet. The current Board are, by association, making a mockery of the people of the Western Isles.
2

Navvy,

07/05/2008 04:28:30
Time for independence for the Western Isles.
What were these lowlanders doing running the board and bringing in their consultant friends?

There is a very strong case for removing most of the non medically qualifed staff at the a senior level

Successful engineering companies are run by engineers, that is by people who understand the business. A good engineer or doctor can hire the right subordinates to carry out these supporting tasks.
Frankly I blame the influence of too many of what we used to call clerks aka lawyers
3

Albina,

Harrogate 07/05/2008 08:13:26
Isn't this about the time that we hear about the rotten management having been awarded millions of pounds in a salary increase?

Albina
4

maximum,

edinburgh 07/05/2008 08:47:19
#2 Consultants in the article refers to doctors rather than management consultants.

As a tax payer I do not want to pay £100,000s to train doctors and then have them sit in meeting rooms descussing management issues, i want them treating patients as they are trained to do. Better leaving management types to manage, with support from medics, as they are trained to do it but have more accountability to the public with the government stepping in when it goes wrong and sacking those who are shown not to be competent. This has been going on for years and the government has stood by and watched this disaster unfold.
5

John McDonald,

Glasgow 07/05/2008 11:08:03
A spokeswoman for the Scottish Government said: "We will now consider the issues raised by the committee and will submit our formal response in due course."

Get your collective fingers out and sort this out now. If it were you’re money you be on it in a nano second.

Why does it take you lot so long to do anything, you trot out all the openness and transparency guff like its a cure all mantra. It isn’t action needs to be taken.

This is a signal that serious reform in public sector is needed, Jim Mather is not stupid so this and many others stories like it do point to a “roadmap for change” or some other piece of jargon.

Do the people in power think we live under rocks? Think again about the decision not to reform public sector change, it’s staring us in the face.

Nicola Sturgeon is doing a great job with the NHS, I know that she has shaken the tree and startled many people who had a cushy job whilst the last administration were in power. Keep it up and remove these inneffectuals. Because whilst they profit, we pay for their failures.
6

TimW1234,

Ottawa, Canada 07/05/2008 11:28:56
As usual the lunatics have taken over the asylum and the health board wouldn't know how to balance their books if their salaries depended on it.

But THEY don't care because they keep giving themselves increases based on the LUDICROUS notion of "performance pay" or "a job well done".

This is just ARRANT NONSENSE because they are INCOMPETENT SPENDTHRIFTS!
7

John Blackley,

Florida 07/05/2008 13:30:13
Perhaps I wasn't reading too well when I read the article but can someone tell me to whom the money is owed? (The three-million-pound deficit, that is.)

Is the health board not paying their suppliers or their employees or is this 'deficit' just the amount by which the health board overspent their annual budgets? (In which case it would be the taxpayer continuing to supply money once the budget's been reached, I assume.)
8

maximum,

edinburgh 07/05/2008 14:30:31
#7 It is the amount that the health board has overspent, so yes, covered by the tax payer from the central pot the scottish government hold. The employees and the suppliers all get paid on time.
9

John Blackley,

Florida 07/05/2008 16:22:06
#8 maximum - thank you.
10

JayJay,

Right here 07/05/2008 22:08:33
I am afraid the concept of a public sector entity being audited, serious flaws being uncovered, and those flaws continuing year on year is not restricted to this one Health Board. Indeed, recent audit reports into, for example, West Dumbartonshire, showed a management board who failed to set any sort of budget and who, bizzarely, were unable to resolve any of the myriad of serious issues identified by Robert Black and the Accounts Commission within a 12-month timeframe - this however is deemed ok in the whacky world of the public sector. Who also could forget the hapless Board of Scottish Enterprise who failed to understand their own budgetary controls, overspent, then rewarded themselves with above inflation pay rises and juicy bonuses all round?
Day after day people pollute these boards with drivel about this tax and that tax, and moan about the unfairness of one tax over another. Meanwhile politicians guffaw, wondering when people might start asking how much, exactly, of the tax take is p*ssed up against a wall by a seemingly never ending line of inept civil servants?
That one chief exec is "seconded" elsewhere in the public sector after demonstrating gross incompetence simply beggars belief. Doubtless though he will take the traditional early retirement complete with well deserved and excessive pay off.
I really do give up!
11

W. Peyronie,

Wester Ross 07/05/2008 22:45:01
This is laughable. "Management" in the NHS is certainly a misnomer.Anyone that works in the NHS, or probably any other public sector for that matter,will be able to concur that public sector managment is, for sure, quite daft, and generally promoted to management level without any degree in business or economics.Most medics are slapping their forehaeds on a daily basis at the sheer stupidity of the management above them, who are usually only aiming to appease crappy public sector audits(which are rarely well thought out or benefit the patient) or appeal to the media. For example, NHS 24 now costs 6x what it did when GPs were allowed to run it, but public satisfaction has plummeted. I give up too!!
12

W. Peyronie,

Wester Ross 07/05/2008 22:49:28
P.S. H.R consultant jobs are advertised in this area at £125,000 per annum. Consultants and GPs start around £70,000

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 

Today's Vote

Should gastric band ops to aid weight loss be available on the NHS?
Yes, this surgery will save lives
Yes, as long as it’s not a cop out for the obese
No, these people are responsible for their weight

Featured Advertising



Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.