Over the years, like every whistleblower, I have probably knocked on a number of doors. Firstly, I wanted the House of Lords to correct what was debated about me in the year 2000. Lord Hutton representing the government had essentially concealed the 1999 and 2001 reports from the House of Lords. Nevertheless, I suspect no one really cared about inaccuracy apart from me. Hansard cannot be corrected as everyone is aware. The government can lie about a subject and that subject has no rights.
Anyhow, in my effort to correct matters, I attempted to approach a number of members of the House of Lords. A number including Lord Ashley of Stoke on Trent had his PA tell me he was too "ill". A week later, I obtained an alert from the House of Lords stating that Lord Ashley was asking questions :). That was indeed a swift recovery. The same appeared to happen with Lord Morris of Manchester. These swift recoveries were simply amazing.
The above is a letter from Baroness Knight. I never knew where Collingtree was until I drove past Northampton. Her letter wasn't too bad. She made sympathetic concerned noises but threw a fit when I sent her the evidence on Ward 87 and requested that she refer the GMC to the Health Select Committee for review. Jill Knight appeared to react extremely badly to evidence. This is what she subsequently said on the 1st March 2006
All of a sudden a number of peers approached in the House of Lords started going off sick every time I approached them. I have a collection of letters from various peers telling me how sick they all were and how they sympathised but could not do anything for me. I subsequently placed a short paragraph on Ward 87 on the House of Lords blog. It was removed swiftly.
The above is a factual account of my experiences with the House of Lords. Essentially, it would not be my habit to approach them. My reason for approaching them is to test out the lay of the land for the average whistleblower. I believe most people consider the above as a personal rejection. It is interesting that few people see that those who refuse to assist whistleblowers today, and those who turn a blind eye to important issues end up developing a future in which they and their families will be eventually be victims of the state. It is the broader picture that is discarded.
I have never been impressed by titles and accolades. David Southall once narrated his visit to the House of Lords. David was on the train when he called me up. It was always great to hear from him. His tales were always so fascinating. Unlike his persona as the public sees him, David is actually a quietly spoken charming man with an art for entertaining stories. I told him that it was his lush puppy appeal that got him invited down to the House of Lords. It was a point of laughter.
David described his lunch there and it was rather amusing. The House of Lords respected David Southall, the kind of respect none of us can ever obtain. They all knew the GMC had not given him a fair trial at all. This visit culminated in the House of Lords debate on David Southall's case. That was the miraculous thing about David, not only was he a smooth sailor but he was also a smooth operator. David has got this way of charming every woman on earth. This is why legions of Baronesses were ready to debate his case in the House of Lords. I just couldn't figure out how he did it - because I certainly don't have the time or patience to smooth talk a peer. I have a simpler way of looking at matters - either they do something about the state of the NHS, or they don't. It was no skin off my nose if they didn't lift a finger. It simply provided more ammunition about the tales of inertia.
In my view, the House of Lords were/ are all public servants. It was entirely up to them whether they wished to take action. It is overtly clear that they didn't wish to take any action. This shows us all that they look upon us tax payers with contempt. The above letters from Baroness Collingtree are fascinating because it shows us that she will make superficial noises but never take the action required in improving the system. Victims require tea and sympathy, whistleblowers demand action.
There is some kind of view within the British establishment that if a peasant is ignored enough, they will go away. Of course, most people do go away. The rest of us document the House of Lord's negative reaction to whistleblowers.
Anyhow, in my effort to correct matters, I attempted to approach a number of members of the House of Lords. A number including Lord Ashley of Stoke on Trent had his PA tell me he was too "ill". A week later, I obtained an alert from the House of Lords stating that Lord Ashley was asking questions :). That was indeed a swift recovery. The same appeared to happen with Lord Morris of Manchester. These swift recoveries were simply amazing.
The above is a letter from Baroness Knight. I never knew where Collingtree was until I drove past Northampton. Her letter wasn't too bad. She made sympathetic concerned noises but threw a fit when I sent her the evidence on Ward 87 and requested that she refer the GMC to the Health Select Committee for review. Jill Knight appeared to react extremely badly to evidence. This is what she subsequently said on the 1st March 2006
"I am somewhat disturbed to receive this huge collection of papers from you and the letter. I must explain that it is never wise to assume that busy people, who have absolutely no duty or responsibility to the sender can possibly find the time to read through such vast numbers of papers as you sent me. I am not at all surprised to hear that Lord Morris declines to take up your case - he has absolutely no duty to do so. Nor, for that matter have I. I certainly will not forward documents to him; he has made it very clear that he does not wish to have them"
All of a sudden a number of peers approached in the House of Lords started going off sick every time I approached them. I have a collection of letters from various peers telling me how sick they all were and how they sympathised but could not do anything for me. I subsequently placed a short paragraph on Ward 87 on the House of Lords blog. It was removed swiftly.
The above is a factual account of my experiences with the House of Lords. Essentially, it would not be my habit to approach them. My reason for approaching them is to test out the lay of the land for the average whistleblower. I believe most people consider the above as a personal rejection. It is interesting that few people see that those who refuse to assist whistleblowers today, and those who turn a blind eye to important issues end up developing a future in which they and their families will be eventually be victims of the state. It is the broader picture that is discarded.
I have never been impressed by titles and accolades. David Southall once narrated his visit to the House of Lords. David was on the train when he called me up. It was always great to hear from him. His tales were always so fascinating. Unlike his persona as the public sees him, David is actually a quietly spoken charming man with an art for entertaining stories. I told him that it was his lush puppy appeal that got him invited down to the House of Lords. It was a point of laughter.
David described his lunch there and it was rather amusing. The House of Lords respected David Southall, the kind of respect none of us can ever obtain. They all knew the GMC had not given him a fair trial at all. This visit culminated in the House of Lords debate on David Southall's case. That was the miraculous thing about David, not only was he a smooth sailor but he was also a smooth operator. David has got this way of charming every woman on earth. This is why legions of Baronesses were ready to debate his case in the House of Lords. I just couldn't figure out how he did it - because I certainly don't have the time or patience to smooth talk a peer. I have a simpler way of looking at matters - either they do something about the state of the NHS, or they don't. It was no skin off my nose if they didn't lift a finger. It simply provided more ammunition about the tales of inertia.
In my view, the House of Lords were/ are all public servants. It was entirely up to them whether they wished to take action. It is overtly clear that they didn't wish to take any action. This shows us all that they look upon us tax payers with contempt. The above letters from Baroness Collingtree are fascinating because it shows us that she will make superficial noises but never take the action required in improving the system. Victims require tea and sympathy, whistleblowers demand action.
There is some kind of view within the British establishment that if a peasant is ignored enough, they will go away. Of course, most people do go away. The rest of us document the House of Lord's negative reaction to whistleblowers.
3 comments:
Jil Knight was evidently a taste of things to come. All this was going on around the time of Shipman and Barton's first brush with the GMC
It is not just that these events were allowed to happen, but that those in charge were not prepared to take appropriate action. That is truly sinister
Post a Comment