Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement


£22m plan to move health staff out of capital axed as 'waste of cash'

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.

Sign In
Register
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:
28 August 2007
SCOTTISH POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT
A PLAN to relocate more than 300 healthcare experts from Edinburgh to Glasgow was scrapped yesterday, after ministers decided it would be a waste of money.
Under the previous Labour Executive's controversial relocation policy, it was recommended that NHS Quality Improvement Scotland (QIS), NHS Health Scotland (HS) and NHS Education for Scotland (NES) should be moved out of the capital.

Following the
move of Scottish Natural Heritage to Inverness at an estimated cost of £30 million, the plan caused concern among MSPs and workers in the capital.

NHS QIS, the health services watchdog, had even warned that patients would be put at risk because of the loss of staff to carry out essential healthcare work.

However, Shona Robison, the minister for public health, has now decided against the move.

She said the £22 million cost of moving staff would be better spent on frontline services.

It is the second time that the SNP-led Executive has come down in favour of the capital. Last month, ministers decided to keep a new Scottish Legal Complaints Commission in Edinburgh.

Staff at the NHS organisations last night welcomed Ms Robison's decision, but Labour insisted the NHS bodies should be going to Glasgow, where there is most need in addressing health inequalities.

The recommendation to move the NHS boards to Glasgow was made in July 2005. It was immediately unpopular, with the majority of staff at NHS QIS claiming they would be unable to leave, therefore causing problems in the service.

Ms Robison sympathised with staff over the two years of uncertainty they had faced. She said: "The £22 million will be better invested in frontline services and in tackling health inequalities - a big challenge in the city of Glasgow."

Ms Robison confirmed that the existing Glasgow-based staff of a fourth special health board, NHS National Services Scotland (NSS) and existing Glasgow-based staff from QIS, NES and HS would remain in the city.

Aileen Stewart, the Scottish healthcare branch secretary for Unison, pointed out that the union was not against the relocation of jobs in principle, but where it was "unnecessary and expensive".

She added: "In these specific cases [involving the NHS boards], relocation of already widely dispersed NHS services made little sense and threatened disruption to the service and expense, increased travel times and potential job losses for staff."

However, Andy Kerr, Labour's health spokesman, insisted the move would have been in the best interests of the NHS.

He said: "This decision is disappointing and I would express doubt over the £22 million savings the SNP claim they will make."

The new Executive is currently carrying out a review of the relocation policy, and Mr Kerr raised concerns for further plans to spread civil service jobs around the country.

QUANGO JOBS ON THE MOVE


Major quangos to be moved from Edinburgh

• Scottish Natural Heritage went to Inverness;
• Transport Scotland went to Glasgow;
• Accountant in Bankruptcy went to Kilwinning;
• Scottish Public Pensions Agency went to Galashiels;
• Enterprise Transport & Life-Long Learning went to Glasgow.

Edin
burgh quangos under consideration
Re
gisters of Scotland, with more than 1,000 staff;
• Creative Scotland, a new body with 100 staff;
• Scottish Funding Council, with 163 staff.



The full article contains 543 words and appears in The Scotsman newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 27 August 2007 9:33 PM
  • Source: The Scotsman
  • Location: Edinburgh
  • Related Topics: Public bodies relocation
 
1

,

28/08/2007 04:02:58
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason: Scotsman Import, Original comment id: 911742, Article id was mapped to record!
2

eric,

Lothian 28/08/2007 06:02:33

And on the same day Glasgow gains 600 new finacial jobs in its fanacial district at Edinburghs expense red tape etc.Also 400 new jobs ,Glasgow just does its own thing always has ,hardly think Glasgow will be shaking at this news,

3

Beergut,

Embra 28/08/2007 07:21:13

A sad reverse for Labour's "pork barrel" politics. Didn't get them any votes anyway did it?

4

donald,

weegieland 28/08/2007 08:19:36

Start building the departments out of the centre now. Recruit locally for the near future and do not recruit anymore in Edinburgh, allowing people to retire or be moved to other departments in Edinburgh and avoid costly and upsetting disruption of family lives.

This will have to be done with the army of Cooncil Tax collectors all over the country, sooner or later.

5

'Hezza,

28/08/2007 09:00:16

It does make sense to keep these institutions in the same place - it must've been very hard for the staff to keep moral up in the face of a move to the weege! Not so much for the folk at the top, as for the folk in the middle and lower ranks, for whom its perhaps more about a work-life balance.

6

Porty Nat,

28/08/2007 10:03:54

Still not caught that train, Joe?

7

Homo Sapiens,

28/08/2007 10:15:23

Well done SNP, finally reason conquers political opportunism! I wish that somehow we could make the parties pay penalties for past efforts to gerrymander votes through "relocations" of quangos, and artifical job creation in their own constituencies.

It is a pity that the Tram project was allowed to proceed without court challanges. It will prove the most disasterous project, and waste of money in the history of scotland (yes, even greater than the Holyrood debacle!)

8

King Doug,

Glasgow 28/08/2007 11:34:57

I love the way Andy Kerr comes out to condemn everything the SNP does i regards to health, particularly when it's reversing some crazy decision he made. It seems this decision is so sensible, not even the most staunch of the anti-SNP parade can be bothered trying to pick holes in it. With staff, MSPs and even the NHS QIS all lining up to say what a waste of time, money and resources this move would have been, it's actually quite disgraceful that Andy Kerr can't admit that there might be just a CHANCE he was wrong. Hopefully more and more people will start to see how stuck in their ways Labour are and not fall for Wendy Alexander's "oooh the SNP only care about independence even though most of what they've done thus far has nothing to do with independence" rhetoric.

9

HEN BROON 5,

28/08/2007 12:08:25

#11 correct Andy Kerr is like a wee fat Jack in the Box who pops up every time he thinks he has found something to score silly school boy points on.
His record as Health Minister was abysmal. He promised 600 new consultants before the last election. and then when it was pointed out to him the target was not met, it became "unimportant."
He is a labour aparatchick who rose without trace and will go back the same way. No better than an office clerk.

Background
In 2003, the Scottish Executive announced that it would increase the number of consultants by 600 by September 2006 with an aim to continue to build on the increase thereafter. This reflects the Executive’s Partnership Agreement commitment, although it should be noted that the recruitment and retention of staff is an operational NHS employer responsibility, under the control of NHS Boards and subject to the financial priorities of Boards.

Since 2003, new consultant contracts have been agreed and implemented across the UK; the numbers of junior doctors in Scotland has increased; and medical training is now under reform with a view to shortening training times for tomorrow’s doctors.
http://www.bma.org.uk/ap.nsf/Content/consultantexpansion

10

HEN BROON 5,

28/08/2007 12:13:18

There is now 1 manager for every bed available in the NHS. It is time these parasites who contribute nothing but and inflated salary and pension bill were culled. Give the hospitals to the patients to control under the beady eye of Matron.

http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/index.cfm?id=2369122005

11

HEN BROON 5,

28/08/2007 12:17:41

By G Y Shin, City of London

"Perhaps I should not have been, but I was recently rather shocked to discover how many managers there are in the National Health Service (NHS).

According to a national newspaper, there are now 40,000 managers in the NHS.
To put this in perspective, there are approximately 120,000 doctors in the NHS.
The Royal Navy has 38,000 personnel (as of November 2006), i.e. there are more managers in the NHS than men & women in the Royal Navy.

Surely 40,000 is simply too many?

I have worked in the NHS as a doctor for over 10 years now.
One of the things that is slowly asphyxiating the Health Service is the sheer scale and mindlessness of its bureaucracy.

There all kinds of managers in the NHS. Most of them have deputy managers with a plethora of job titles & functions - it is not always easy to tell what they actually DO.

I sometimes wonder whether the larger NHS Trusts have a "keep track of all the other managers, there are just so many of them" manager.

One of my colleagues who works in the NHS in England, recently had occasion to visit one of the many administrative offices. He saw various bureaucrats doing crosswords, a Mensa puzzle (!) and reading Hello magazine.
I rest my case.

The article with the NHS manager statistic:

http://politics.guardian.co.uk/publicservices/story/0,,19...;

12

Declan,

Glasgow 28/08/2007 12:40:40

I agree that jobs that are already in place somewhere should stay there - it must not be pleasant for those people employed in Edinburgh in jobs that may move somewhere else. However new jobs should be created across Scotland and not automatically put into Edinburgh. The whole country needs to benefit!

Besides which, Edinburgh is congested enough as it is and we are only adding to that by creating jobs in its centre.

#4 - Joeing 737 from Livingston, it would be good if you would go lie on Edinburgh's runway for a while. Your posts are nothing short of pathetic!

13

Tomsk,

Gay Man's Dundee 28/08/2007 14:37:44

As a result of devolution there has been an increase in the number of public sector workers required to service those areas of government devolved to the Scottish Parliament. Every reasonable effort should have been made to disperse those new jobs efficiently across Scotland. It was right that the Scottish Executive adopted a default position that no new agencies or departments would be located in Edinburgh. It was not right that existing agencies and departments should be relocated in the manner that followed.

The dispersal of jobs -- as numerous independent expert commentators have shown – has been inefficient and wasteful, but also disruptive, without care for the people affected and too often motivated by short-term political considerations rather than sound administrative principles. A disproportionate number of jobs has simply been uprooted from Edinburgh and shifted along the M8 to Labour's voter heartland. It is salutary to note that the only body still defending this iniquitous practice is the Labour Party.

This decision by the SNP is to be welcomed.

These are not the words of a nationalist. I am by instinct a Labour voter, but disgusted by the manner in which the Labour Party in Scotland has treated Edinburgh as nothing more than a cash cow did not vote for the party at the last election. If the words of Andy Kerr are an indication of the way the party is heading then I don’t see me voting for his party again for a very long time.

14

Jock Tamson,

Scotland, Caledonia, Alba 28/08/2007 16:51:38

Labour's idea of relocation was to move them to Glasgow. If you look at the relocations already in place, then you will begin to see what was really happening.

It took the Hootsman long enough to see the light, though, but they eventually published some facts and figures. It was more like an asset strip than a decentralisation agenda.


 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
RSS Feed of this article's comments
Delivery formats: RSS, Atom, Javascript & Email
 
  

 
 


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.