SilentCallsVictim wrote on Sep 16
th, 2009 at 2:36pm:
P.S. Members may wish to report a "broken link" on the
NEG website. (The item is labelled "NEG government consultation 084
click here")
The published response to the DH consultation, which was available some hours ago, has apparently been removed. This would seem odd, considering the pride in this work that is reflected in the recent comments on the government reaction to it.
,
any technical problems have been overcome; the link from the main NEG website works again. The index page is
here.
Mr Rayment can once again take pride in everyone being able to see how NEG demonstrated to the Department of Health that
Quote:For virtually all patients' calls, the local GPs’ 084 number is not more expensive to call than using an ordinary number
This was achieved using the figures given on
this page. The message is delivered by the graphics found on the pages linked from there.
One may see that the phrase "virtually all" only excludes those who make calls lasting longer than 12 minutes.
Everybody calls 0844 numbers using the "BT Standard" tariff, even those who suffer the higher setup fee for non-inclusive 01/02/03 calls because they are on a BT call plan (although oddly this group are exempted from the 1 April rate increase to 4.5p!). Even more oddly, those who call 01/02/03 numbers on the “BT Standard” tariff incur the setup fee that applies to call plans.
This is a "
fact" (according to the definition of that word employed by NEG). The figure given for 0844 calls is not incorrect. It is just irrelevant and set against figures that are incorrect, leaving the result even more meaningless than it would have been if the correct figures had been used for this highly selective atypical example. This simply makes no useful contribution to the debate, even the corrected figures for these examples do not prove anything of great significance either way.
We can all review these figures and reflect on Mr Rayment's further
quoted comment from Monday.
Quote:We were always confident that, once the full facts about NHS telephony services were considered objectively by the Department of Health, the retention of the option to choose 084 numbers would be seen to be the best solution for patients, GPs and the NHS. We congratulate Ministers on their willingness to listen and respond fairly and responsibly to the facts.
To be fair to Mr O'Brien, he may not have been swayed by these "facts". He has not bought them hook, line and sinker. The proposed solution to the problem is stated as being conditional on them being true (which is why it is a waste of time).
Mr O'Brien has however almost echoed NEG's words as it proposes its recommended solution in the
Executive Summary of the response.
Quote:Promote choice for primary care providers and competition between 03 and 084 solutions
This is remarkably similar to the third point in
the DH announcement:
Quote:The ban on the use of numbers charging patients a premium rate to call NHS services will allow a marketplace to evolve where 084 numbers compete alongside 01, 02 and 03 numbers
To my mind the threats contained in the following statement, also from the Executive Summary of NEG's response, explains why we do not yet have a solution to the problem. Unlike some of the nonsense, these comments are serious and require serious attention. I fear that officials have not yet succeeded in dealing with this. They have announced an "outcome" from the consultation, and suggested that an unworkable solution will be implemented, when these serious matters have yet to be resolved.
Quote:The forced migration of 084 to 03 numbers would remove competition for quality at a local level - forcibly remove existing valued providers from the marketplace - and, in our view, could require a massive and open-ended commitment to taxpayer subsidy which we consider to be unnecessary and unworkable in the medium to long term.
Pages: 
Doctors' phone line use reviewed - DH consultation (Read 313,857 times)
