16 Jun 2006

Warner on health records: spin first, and have a token consultation too

I see the government is to press ahead faster with electronic patient records (DoH press release). But some people have severe reservations about how this is being done and the likely unintended side-effects. I think their views should not lightly be dismissed. So how can the government ensure NHS IT is built on a Foundation of Trust? The right answer is good consultation. They choose the wrong answer which is spin:

Lord Warner also announced the development of a public information campaign to explain the patient benefits and implications of moving to electronic patient records. This will build on the work already done with the profession, and on the information guarantee. A further announcement will be made in due course. 

The Minister Lord Warner goes on say

I understand fully the concerns and reservations some doctors have about electronic patient records. We will fully consult with all professional interests and patients on the nature of the summary record and the confidentiality safeguards. But now is the time for leadership in this area and by that I mean clinical leadership as well.

He’s dimly aware some people think there’s a problem, and understands that consultation is a good word to use in that situation. But he proposes the sort of consultation that gets stuck in a press release somwhere below the public information campaign to explain the benefits, not the sort that helps you work out how to deliver the benefits and avoid the unintended consequences.

My impression of Lord Warner was formed during 1998 when we doing groundbreaking research into the information systems government would use to measure the five pledges on which it had come to power. Norman W (then policy adviser at the Home Office under Jack Straw) sent us a curt and dismissive reply, and after a PQ on the same lines it was clear to us there was no decent system in place to measure these pledges and - with the Hon. exception of Cabinet Office minister David Clarke - no particular interest in talking to people who were good at this sort of thing and trying to open a conversation.

This was part of the horrible dawning realisation that these people aren’t very good at doing the job we need from them, and the danger - which has reared its head again and again in thelast decade - that those making the decisions about e-enabled government dont understand technology and don’t care about building it on a foundation of trust. Warner is located in my black book as an exemplar of this problem, since ennobled and promoted but no better as far as I can see. One good conversation, one enlightened engagement with him would change my mood. Maybe just expressing my opinion that in my direct experience he’s rude and not good enough at his job will make me feel better about it; after all I’ve been cross about it for eight years now. 

 
Page 1 of 1 pages

Ideal Government

Let's say what we want from e-enabled government. Let's observe government first-hand. Let's say "Wouldn't It Be Better If" (WIBBI). Become an ethnographer of bureaucracy today! It beats getting frustrated with public services.

Categories

Comment

Anyone is free to comment. Or mail with an article if you want to be an author. I'll post it up and send you a password. This whole thing is supported by Kable.

Authors

Member List

Sign up for new articles

Locations of visitors to this page

Copyright

Creative Commons License - Some Rights Reserved Protect your Bits. Support ORG. Open Rights Group

Designed by...

visit ScoreCommunications Ltd

Statistics

This page has been viewed 2107448 times

Entries: 1822 | Comments: 2913 | Trackbacks: 212
Most Recent Entry: 07/03/2009 05:43 pm
Most Recent Comment: 07/02/2009 11:12 am

Members: 185 | Logged in: 0 | Guests: 20
Most recent visitor: 07/04/2009 05:07 pm
Most visitors ever: 443 on 10/12/2005 02:21 pm