8 responses to “Tweets Arising from Addenbrooke’s Board Papers – June 2017”
I’ve commented some of the matters mentioned:
Only about 0.7% of those who could have registered and taken part in the latest elections for Addenbrooke’s governors did so. We should either use an extended version of the same electoral roll as we do for councillor and MP elections and let everyone know when these elections are happening, or rather than running separate elections, we could make more councillors governors. Councillors already have a solid electoral mandate and expanding their role could help co-ordination between the NHS and local councils, and strengthen the role of councillor, and increase interest in local elections.
I have sought to lobby Mr Richardson on an array of subjects relating to his role running our local hospital, including transparency of governance, effective communication with GPs and tackling staff recruitment challenges but I’ve received no response.
There appear to be major governance failings at Addenbrookes with key decisions being made between publicised governors meetings. The hospital has more patients than it can cope with.
It should be easy for all of us to see the challenges the hospital is facing, and how it is responding to them. I’ve been refused access to effectively report at governors meetings and am lobbying seeking the application of the rights to report we now have at local council meetings applied to governors meetings at NHS trusts, clinical commissioning groups and other bodies where strategic decisions on running our health services are made.
It has been pointed out to me that the level of registration as “members” to participate in elections, and turnout, among those registered for the Cambridgeshire and Peterborough NHS Foundation Trust (CPFT) elections is even worse than at Addenbrookes. The CPFT provide community, mental health and learning disability services.
In the latest CPFT elections for public governors from Cambridgeshire there only 5,720 people were registered to vote; and only 361 votes were cast – a 6.3% turnout of those registered. There are no age restrictions on membership, so the turnout was just 0.06% of Cambridgeshire’s ~635,100 population [Mid 2013 data – latest from CambsInsight ]
The breakdown of those 361 votes between the candidates hasn’t been released.
8 responses to “Tweets Arising from Addenbrooke’s Board Papers – June 2017”
I’ve commented some of the matters mentioned:
It has been pointed out to me that the level of registration as “members” to participate in elections, and turnout, among those registered for the Cambridgeshire and Peterborough NHS Foundation Trust (CPFT) elections is even worse than at Addenbrookes. The CPFT provide community, mental health and learning disability services.
In the latest CPFT elections for public governors from Cambridgeshire there only 5,720 people were registered to vote; and only 361 votes were cast – a 6.3% turnout of those registered. There are no age restrictions on membership, so the turnout was just 0.06% of Cambridgeshire’s ~635,100 population [Mid 2013 data – latest from CambsInsight ]
The breakdown of those 361 votes between the candidates hasn’t been released.
http://www.cpft.nhs.uk/about-us/governor-elections-2017.htm
http://www.cpft.nhs.uk/Downloads/DVD-Documents/Governor%20Elections%202017/Public_Cambridgeshire%20Declaration.pdf
Despite governors of other classes being described as “elected” it no election results are given. Papers for an April 2017 meeting of the governors show there were uncontested elections.
I’ve made a FOI request for the council of governors papers which don’t appear to have been published:
https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/unpublished_papers_for_council_o