Welcome Guest | Login | Register | Why Register? |
Newsletter RSS Twitter
14 March 2010 | 23:24 GMT


HOME | NEWS | DOCUMENT LIBRARY | FEATURES | OPINION & ANALYSIS | EVENTS | RESEARCH REPORTS | AWARDS | PODCASTS | VIDEO DIARIES

Burnham defends NPfIT but cuts £600m

Tags: A   Burnham   CfH   Credit crunch   Darling   DH   HIS   Lansley   NPfIT   Pre-Budget Report  

07 Dec 2009

Health secretary Andy Burnham has launched a spirited defence of the National Programme for IT in the NHS in the House of Commons.

In an emergency statement on the future of the programme triggered by comments made by Chancellor Alastair Darling on Sunday, Burnham said the programme was a “key part of the modernisation of the NHS” and that the health service could not function without it.

On the BBC’s Andrew Marr show, the Chancellor had indicated that NPfIT was “not essential to the frontline” and that it might be something “we do not need to go ahead with right now.”

However, Burnham indicated that the Chancellor had not been talking about the whole programme or even whole projects within it.

He said that given the “current economic climate” he and senior officials had been looking at spending across the Department of Health. He said this included spending on IT and this was “what the Chancellor talked about yesterday.”

Burnham said £600m would be saved from the £12.7 billion programme, which had spent £4.5 billion as of the end of the financial year.

E-Health Insider understands that this money will come from “back office” savings in the way that the programme itself is run and from looking again at the scope of some planned systems.

For example, GPs and NHS trusts may be given more scope to retain and build on existing systems, instead of having to replace them with NPfIT functionality when it is available.

“We are discussing with our suppliers potential reductions to the scope of the systems and the cost savings that could be generated,” Burnham told the Commons, although he insisted that the details had to remain confidential.

At the end of his statement, shadow health secretary Andrew Lansley invited his counterpart to “have the grace to admit that the programme has been an abject failure” that had “stifled IT innovation in hospitals.”

However, Burnham said the programme had delivered significant benefits, such as digital imaging, that were recognised by clinicians.

In a surprise move, one of the British Medical Association’s GP leaders and IT spokesmen backed the programme this morning. The BMA has been a critic of the programme and repeated its call for it to be scrapped earlier this year.

But Dr Grant Ingrams, chair of the GP Committee’s IT subcommittee, said savings would be better made elsewhere in the NHS.

“I think it’s short-sighted, I think it’s going to waste money," he said. "The way it was procured years ago was wrong, and could have been done better – but now it’s getting to a point where it’s likely to be rolled out very soon.”

Burnham told Lansley that he should “listen to what doctors are saying” before making “sweeping statements” about the national programme. He also repeated denials that the programme was over budget, insisting that its contracts meant “we get what we pay for.”

Burnham listed the programme’s achievements as: digital imaging, the Choose and Book, electronic prescription service and GP2GP systems and Summary Care Records, which he said would make “key information” available to clinicians.

Lyn Whitfield

Related Articles
Related Articles

© 2009 E-HEALTH-MEDIA LTD. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

Readers Comments
Add a comment
Readers Comments

1

Some sense at least...

07 Dec 09 18:23

The news yesterday about the comment on the Andrew Marr shoe were a major shock but it seems at least a little sense has prevailed and even the BMA has chipped in support.

Such an announcement is worrying as even though the National Programme has had its ups and downs surely 2010 is a critical time where people decide if such products as Lorenzo are actually fit for purpose. The back out costs and major job losses would be immense so why not spend the hundreds of millions of pounds ensuring that something actually is worth it or not.

It is great that people in the BMA are coming up with some support and can all of those people who are always negative please remember back to 2002/03 when yes some hospital IT was innovative but a major block of trusts had teams that had become complacement and produced systems which would be classed as overly dangerous if they were deployed as NPFIT systems.

Please can the government sort its act out, they allowed the banks to run riot, can't handle the people who got greedy and now make stupid annoucements which cause havoc in a sector that is finally settling down and opening up again.

As a final note, I noticed in a previous article comments about the research done by Harvard, I dont think many people have read it but being semi related to their activities, it is focussed upon a completely different type of healthcare system and should not be taken in the context many people cite.

 


2

Torpedo or slow fuse depth charge?

07 Dec 09 19:26

So it sounds like Burnham is going to savage CfH and allow more local control over what they have and how they get it.

Less of the crazy bits of the OBS and more stuff that helps the clinicians perhaps?

That wouldn't be a bad outcome. Would it?


3

No word from the Chancellor then

09 Dec 09 14:18

I watched the report in my lunchbreak and didn't see any specifics about NPfIT at all.

The only clear message in his report was "taxes up to pay for bailing out our mates at the banks."

I'm none the wiser.

Carry on regardless?

Search
News Features Jobs Newsletters
EHI Tweets HIMSS10’
EHI Tweets HIMSS10’
Most commented
Most commented
Tags
Tags
Top jobs
More
Top jobs

Featured_recruiters
Featured_recruiters