X

Create an account to continue reading.

Registered readers have access to our blogs and a limited number of magazine articles
For unlimited access to The Spectator, subscribe below

Registered readers have access to our blogs and a limited number of magazine articles

Sign in to continue

Already have an account?

What's my subscriber number?

Subscribe now from £1 a week

Online

Unlimited access to The Spectator including the full archive from 1828

Print

Weekly delivery of the magazine

App

Phone & tablet edition of the magazine

Spectator Club

Subscriber-only offers, events and discounts
 
View subscription offers

Already a subscriber?

or

Subscribe now for unlimited access

ALL FROM JUST £1 A WEEK

View subscription offers

Thank you for creating your account – To update your details click here to manage your account

Thank you for creating your account – To update your details click here to manage your account

Thank you for creating an account – Your subscriber number was not recognised though. To link your subscription visit the My Account page

Thank you for creating your account – To update your details click here to manage your account

X

Login

Don't have an account? Sign up
X

Subscription expired

Your subscription has expired. Please go to My Account to renew it or view subscription offers.

X

Forgot Password

Please check your email

If the email address you entered is associated with a web account on our system, you will receive an email from us with instructions for resetting your password.

If you don't receive this email, please check your junk mail folder.

X

It's time to subscribe.

You've read all your free Spectator magazine articles for this month.

Subscribe now for unlimited access – from just £1 a week

You've read all your free Spectator magazine articles for this month.

Subscribe now for unlimited access

Online

Unlimited access to The Spectator including the full archive from 1828

Print

Weekly delivery of the magazine

App

Phone & tablet edition of the magazine

Spectator Club

Subscriber-only offers, events and discounts
X

Sign up

What's my subscriber number? Already have an account?

Thank you for creating your account – To update your details click here to manage your account

Thank you for creating your account – To update your details click here to manage your account

Thank you for creating an account – Your subscriber number was not recognised though. To link your subscription visit the My Account page

Thank you for creating your account – To update your details click here to manage your account

X

Your subscriber number is the 8 digit number printed above your name on the address sheet sent with your magazine each week.

Entering your subscriber number will enable full access to all magazine articles on the site.

If you cannot find your subscriber number then please contact us on customerhelp@subscriptions.co.uk or call 0330 333 0050.

You can create an account in the meantime and link your subscription at a later time. Simply visit the My Account page, enter your subscriber number in the relevant field and click 'submit changes'.

Please note: Previously subscribers used a 'WebID' to log into the website. Your subscriber number is not the same as the WebID. Please ensure you use the subscriber number when you link your subscription.

Coffee House

David Cameron’s sombre response to Mid-Staffs report includes hint of political row to come

6 February 2013

3:19 PM

6 February 2013

3:19 PM

David Cameron does big solemn occasions well. He’s skilled at taking a statement above the usual tit-for-tat partisan exchanges in the Commons. Everyone knows that, as does the Prime Minister, which is why he made the statement on the Francis Report rather than the Health Secretary. The Tories know that turning the response to this inquiry into a political football would not serve the party well, given Labour’s 16-point lead in the polls on the NHS.

The tone was sombre, with the Prime Minister apologising for the suffering caused by failures at the Mid Staffordshire NHS trust. He also emphasised that today was not about hunting down scapegoats, even though some are calling for the resignation of Sir David Nicholson as NHS chief executive. But though he sought to make the tone of today’s statement apolitical, with Andy Burnham, who was Health Secretary at the time, nodding his head in a agreement at a number of points in the statement, the Prime Minister did point to one part of the government’s response which could well spark political tensions with the opposition.

[Alt-Text]


It is difficult to disagree with his emphasis on a culture of care in the health service, but the Prime Minister did also tell MPs that he was minded to support performance-related pay for staff. He said:

‘Nurses should be hired and promoted on the basis of having compassion as a vocation, not just academic qualifications. We need a style of leadership from senior nurses which means poor practice is not tolerated and is driven off the wards. Another issue is whether pay should be linked to quality of care rather than just time served at a hospital. I favour this approach.’

Given the reaction of the teaching unions to performance-related pay, doing the same for nurses could well be difficult for Labour to support, and when such proposals come to Parliament, there is unlikely to be such a solemn tone in the Chamber as there was today.

Subscribe to The Spectator today for a quality of argument not found in any other publication. Get more Spectator for less – just £12 for 12 issues.


Show comments
Close