Dave wrote on Sep 29^th, 2009 at 8:05pm:

The point that is missed is that use of 084 numbers DOES provide the additional functionality. The revenue share money earned from callers is used to pay for it, wherever it is technically deployed.

The issue is about money, not technology.

NGMsGhost wrote on Sep 29^th, 2009 at 8:20pm:

It is for the DH to consult when and how it chooses and to handle the responses in whatever way it wishes.

It is for respondents who wish their responses to be seen in the public domain to publish them. There are links to two from the NHS.Patient website. If many more were published, I would happily arrange a proper catalogue.

The situation has however now moved on with the consultation having concluded and largely produced the effect that we wished for. The right words have been spoken by the Minister in response.

They have however been combined with some very silly words and largely ineffective action is being taken. There may be some merit in drawing from the unhappy past, however we must be focused on moving forward to a happier future.

(P.S. I note that other postings have been made since those I am responding to. I have nothing to add.)

Source: Southport Visiter

http://www.southportvisiter.co.uk/southport-news/southport-southport-news/2009/1...

<<

NHS will end premium-rate call charges to Southport surgeries

Oct 7 2009  by John Siddle, Midweek Visiter

PATIENTS, who were charged up to 40p a minute to ring Southport surgeries, are quids in after the NHS decided to scrap premium rate telephone calls.

St Marks Medical Centre, Derby Road and Ainsdale Medical Centre are among those currently using controversial 084 and 085 prefixes, which sees callers charged 4.2p per minute from a BT landline and up to 40p from a mobile.

Now, after a consultation with MPs, changes in tariffs mean patients will still dial 084 numbers but will only pay for the cost of a local call.

The changes, which will be introduced over the coming months, have been welcomed by Southport MP, John Pugh.

He said: “High cost phone numbers have been creeping like a disease throughout the NHS and other public services.

“People have no choice but to phone and we should not be profiting from the sick.”

[…]

>>


This twaddle about tariffs being changed continues. St Marks Medical Centre should do the right thing and publish its geographical number, 01704 511799.

Heinz wrote on Oct 8^th, 2009 at 6:22pm:


As I am sure you know even you are not correct   from 1st October the cost for a daytime chargeable 01/02/03 call from BT is 5.25ppm with a 9.05p set up fee, source,BT Tarrif Guide

derrick wrote on Oct 9^th, 2009 at 11:44am:


Sorry Heinz, I,(still), keep mixing up/forgetting the 0844 & 01/02/03 numbering set up
maybe they are getting to me

Article on page 12 of todays' Sunday Post

Ban on costly calls to surgeries

http://www.dcthomson.co.uk/mags/post/postindex.htm

DOCTORS’ surgeries and hospitals are to be banned from imposing premium-rate phone numbers on patients.

Some have been charging up to 40p a minute more than standard costs for calls to make appointments.

Health secretary Nicola Sturgeon is to put pressure on NHS boards and GP practices to replace the numbers with cheaper alternatives.

The move will bring Scotland into line with England, where a ban was announced last month following a public outcry.

Premium rate

Dozens of medical practices use premium rate 084 numbers that enable them to collect a portion of the charge paid by callers.

Under the new rules the 084 prefix may still be used but the tariff must be adjusted to ensure patients only pay the equivalent of a local call.

This is already the case with calls to NHS 24.

Last night Margaret Watt, of the Scotland Patients’ Association, called for any profits already generated from the numbers to be repaid.

She said, “These numbers are a tax on the sick. We welcome the ban but NHS boards and GP practices should be forced to reinvest any profits made from them back into front-line health services.”

Doctors and dentists were prohibited from using national rate 0870 numbers more than four years ago.

But it emerged during an Ofcom consultation earlier this year that many had switched to high-tariff 084 lines instead. While not as expensive as 0870 numbers, these are still much dearer than a local call.

Not penalised

Dr Dean Marshall, chairman of the BMA’s Scottish GP Committee, agrees that patients who call their surgery because they’re ill should not be penalised.

He said, “These numbers are not widely used by GP practices.

“However, we hope phone companies who supply these lines to practices in Scotland will agree to ensure that their tariffs are in line with local charges. This principle should apply to all public services.”

Meanwhile, the Scottish Government is investigating the feasibility of switching NHS 24 from its current 0845 number to a special three-digit non-emergency code.

Previous plans to make all landline calls to NHS 24 free were ditched because of the £300,000-a-year estimated cost.

A Scottish Government spokeswoman said, “We strongly believe patients should be charged as little as possible when they contact health services.

“GP practices should be encouraged to ensure new contracts ensure patients are charged the lowest rate possible and in the case of existing contracts, that GPs enter into talks with their provider to achieve revised agreements that would see patients pay the lowest rate practicable.”

Heinz wrote on Oct 18^th, 2009 at 7:20pm:


Even though 0844 numbers are almost never included in mobile phone bundled minutes or landline call packages and BT Payphones division still charges 1800% more per minute to call an 0844 number than a number starting 01/02/03.

I presume New Labour reckons they will have been booted out of office by the time the chickens home to roost and that the incoming Conservative government will then be forced to pick up the pieces.

SilentCallsVictim wrote on Oct 18^th, 2009 at 9:01pm:


Once again SCV you return to that self defeating argument in an open public forum where our opponents will be reading what we post.  I am surprised that one normally so conscious as you of the dangers of entering in to arguments that undermine what the campaign is trying to achieve now does so in this open public forum.  Oh but hang on aren't you now a one man NHS phone calls campaigner who does your own thing so as not to have the logical inconsistencies in your own campaigning positions exposed.  If so then what are you doing posting here?

The money can always be found to do things when there is the political will.  Just look at Iraq or Afghanistan and the cost of making these change to phone numbers used for call centres is utterly piffling amounts that is of no consequence at all in the overall context of the budgets of the organisations we are talking about.  The amounts of money involved are only significant to the parasites who vend these numbers to the public sector.

I remain at a loss to understand why as a supposed suporter of this campaign you suddenly start advancing arguments that I would expect to hear only from Network Europe Group or from some slimey chief executive of a local authority paid over £200,000 per annum and with a Marie Antoinette like attitude towards the cost of phone calls by their local residents.