Another story, this time from the Telegraph & Argus in Bradford:

NHS to probe Bradford surgeries' use of premium numbers

idb wrote on May 3^rd, 2013 at 12:54am:

This item has featured on the fair telecoms campaign news feed for over 24 hours.

That feed now contains a reference to a blogging - Comment formerly published by 'Pulse', which shows the relevant part of what Pulse had previously published - now published by Google cache.

I have little to add, but I would have thought that if this news item warrants a mention in this discussion forum then this should be for the purpose of making comment. We are keen for fellow campaigners to be aware of all developments, but we cannot duplicate our efforts, or worse, by continually updating many channels with news stories.

SilentCallsVictim wrote on May 3^rd, 2013 at 3:10am:
So what. And your point is...?

SilentCallsVictim wrote on May 3^rd, 2013 at 3:10am:
Why does the posting of a relevant news item cause any 'duplication of effort'? Just because a news item appears in the fair telecoms news feed it does not automatically mean that it cannot appear here either. I suspect that this discussion forum has greater visibility than the news feed simply because of its age. Even if it doesn't, just what is the specific problem with posting the same item here? Does the news feed have a monopoly on aggregation of news items? I have contributed news items for many years, some with comment, many without. It has never been an issue.... until now! The opportunity for friendly debate within this medium is sadly long gone, with contributors often berated for their views.

To address a misunderstanding, I have been asked to make it clear that the following comment was offered in the same way that any member of the forum may offer a personal opinion.

SilentCallsVictim wrote on May 3^rd, 2013 at 3:10am:

I had intended my later posting (#560) to indicate my acceptance that many active campaigners will always continue to use the SayNoTo0870 forum as their means of announcing developments, by reproducing the text of published material with links. In turn, they and others will look for, and expect to find, such postings as their way of keeping up to date with developments. If my comments were not clear on this point, then I must offer an explicit assurance that I fully accept and understand this reality.

I would indeed "like to think" that the forum was used simply as a means of open public discussion, the purpose for which it is well suited, with individual topics being opened for discussion and a thread of comments following. The forum does not offer a ready means for it to be used as a way of being notified only of news developments on subjects of interest that are published elsewhere. I must however accept that some wish it to be used for that purpose.

I hope it is clear to all that it is not for me, or any member, to direct others in their use of the forum. If anyone has found valid grounds for thinking that I believed otherwise, when expressing a personal opinion, then I must apologise.


The fair telecoms campaign was established to provide a means for those who are engaged in active campaigning on relevant issues to co-ordinate their efforts so as to make them more effective. Given limited time and energy, we seek to maximise what may be achieved from the effort that can be expended.

Through its website (which is not supported by advertising), the campaign seeks to offer a resource for those who are interested in following the issues it covers. It features a library of relevant radio and TV items and an archive of media coverage. Although comments in response to entries on its blog are invited, it does not offer a discussion forum or database of alternative numbers. It aims only to complement existing well established resources on the internet.

A feed of news items covering both external and internal activity is provided, with the opportunity to view this on demand, be notified of new items by email (no more than once a day) or maintain a constant link through any RSS news reader. All news items are also "tweeted" on one twitter account and selectively "re-tweeted" on another. A Facebook page also carries all news, but this is not yet properly branded and is not promoted.


To conclude with an "on topic" remark - we are expecting news stories on this topic to be published in two national newspapers tomorrow. (N.B. nothing in the news media can be guaranteed in advance - except perhaps speculation about the result of the general election that will occur in two years time.)

We hope that these articles will be published online in time for inclusion in the news feed email update which only goes out at 8:00 AM. Followers of this thread are obviously free to decide whether to subscribe to that feed (which also covers other topics addressed by the fair telecoms campaign) or perhaps wait for someone to reproduce the copy as a posting in this forum.

I hope that I have now made my point, as requested. We have different views and opinions, but I hope we are all able to understand each other.

bigjohn wrote on May 7^th, 2013 at 4:40am:

SilentCallsVictim wrote on May 4^th, 2013 at 9:51am:

This most relevant Wales item was included in the fair telecoms campaign news feed on Sunday morning, along with a news release in response. A further briefing has subsequently been added to cover the radical announcement made.

The other expected item, covering the nation of England, has not yet appeared. We are expecting a good amount of further coverage of the exciting development across all media to be prepared when journalists return from their long weekend break.

loddon wrote on May 29^th, 2013 at 8:22am:


Do NHS England have any backstop powers that they could use, however reluctantly (rather like the ICO who has theoretical draconian powers to fine but is very loathed to use them) to start fining GP Practices if they do not come in to line.  How about then starting by fining all the guilty practices a flat £5,000 and the indicate another fine of £20,000 will be imposed if they not complied in a further six months time.

Greedy GPs who use 0844 numbers are only interested in money (and clearly not their patients) so why not play them at their own game by making the continued use of 0844 numbers cost them more than they were saving in free switchboard equipment and maintenance.

Keith wrote on May 31^st, 2013 at 8:39am:


Thanks Keith.

I do hope SilentCallsVictim and Dave would also support a more proactive approach of this kind by NHS England.

After all if they found the same GPs dishing out tablets not licensed by the Medicines Agency for sale in the UK I am sure they would not take such a benign and easy going view as they do about continued misuse of 084 numbers.

http://www.gponline.com/News/article/1184114/practices-face-60000-penalty-0844-p...

Practices face £60,000 penalty over 0844 phone lines

By Marina Soteriou, 29 May 2013

<<
NHS England said it was ‘actively reviewing' use of 0844 numbers by practices and warned that it will ‘act’ on its findings. GPs said NHS England had warned them they were in breach of their contract by continuing to use these phone numbers.

In the 2010/11 GMS contract, the DH banned practices from signing up to new phone lines that charge patients more than local rates.

But GP leaders said some practices still hold contracts with service providers lasting up to seven years, and would face severe financial penalties if they ended their contract early.

Dr Deborah Colvin, chair of City and Hackney LMC, told the UK LMCs conference last week that her practice was under pressure from NHS England to stop using its 0844 number.

She said: ‘In order to get out of our contract it would cost us £60,000. We’ve explained that to the patients, we’ve explained that to NHS England, but we are being told that we are in breach of our [NHS] contract.

‘We put the 0844 number into our surgery a couple of years ago in order to increase the number of lines for patients so that they would get through easier, having been reassured that it would be cheaper for patients to ring us that way.'

However, GPC deputy chairman Dr Richard Vautrey said that practices are not in breach of their NHS contract for having 0844 numbers and advised those affected to also provide a geographical number for patients who request one.

‘Practices can’t be bullied into making a change before their contract is up,’ he said. ‘Some of the contracts last up to seven years.’

Dr Vautrey said that in many parts of the country, practices had been encouraged to use 0844 numbers by the DH or PCTs but have since been under pressure over the past few years to stop using them. ‘This is no fault of practices that they have found themselves in this situation,’ he said.

An NHS England spokeswoman said: ‘NHS England supports guidance from the DH that GP practices should not enter into any new contracts for telephone services that would mean patients pay more than the cost of a geographical call to their practice.

‘GP practices were required to review existing arrangements by 1 April 2011. This remains the case. We are actively reviewing the extent of use of 0844 numbers and will act upon our findings as and when this work has been carried out.’
>>