Showing posts with label 'think tank'. Show all posts
Showing posts with label 'think tank'. Show all posts

Monday, 24 June 2013

Communications reveal 2020 Health working with Lord Howe to make the NHS a"UK Plc Asset"



Documents released by the Department of Health under the Freedom of Information Act reveal a healthcare think tank with multiple links to coalition peers wants to turn the NHS into an “asset” of “UK Plc” - and which suggests the government needs to “charm” private healthcare “international corporations”

2020health calls itself an ”independent, grass roots think tank” whose purpose is to “create the conditions for a healthy society through research, evaluation, campaigning and relationships.

Correspondence between the health minister Earl Howe, former patron of 2020 Health, and the think tank’s founder Julia Manning reveals some of the nature of these ‘relationships’.

At Julia Manning’s invitation, Earl Howe was a guest speaker at a ‘high-level discussion breakfast roundtable’ with key clinical and industry leaders back in February 2011, during the ‘listening pause’ in the passage of the Health & Social Care Act through parliament. After the meeting, Ms Manning wrote to thank Earl Howe. In the letter, which has been obtained by Social Investigations, she noted that Earl Howe had told the meeting that the message of the UK health being open for business was “not getting through.”

Manning had asked what should be done to attract “global companies to the UK.” She pushed for a “radical message” to make the NHS part of the “UK PLC”, an “asset” and “driver of economic growth.”


Manning warned that historically, the NHS had been good at “repelling business” and that investment in healthcare was “much easier in the USA.”

She laid the blame for the lack of movement at the door of the last Labour government, who she said had gained a reputation for “bureaucratic obstructions to market access.”

Such correspondence adds to the concern that the Health and Social Care Act was less about improving services and more about opening up the public-funded health service to big business. In other words, the ‘UK PLC’ Ms Manning envisages and has so earnestly promoted to Earl Howe. Throughout the progress of the Health and Social Care bill, Manning acted as a champion for private healthcare involvement in the NHS and wrote several articles that promoted the ‘benefits’ they bring into the NHS

In order to open up the NHS to a market, Julia Manning also advised Lord Howe that ”international corporations” should be met with a “charm and diplomatic offensive by high level officials.”

Many may baulk at the idea that our elected government should beg for corporate attention within the NHS. But prior to the Health bill being passed into law, Earl Howe told a forumhosted by healthcare market researchers Laing and Busisson that ‘‘The opening up of the NHS creates genuine opportunities for those of you who can offer high quality, convenient services that compete favourably with current NHS care… There will be big opportunities for the private sector”.

In later correspondence, Julia Manning went on a charm offensive of her own. In March this year she asked Earl Howe to become a member of 2020health and to ‘join us and share in this adventure’. Whether Earl Howe accepted her offer is currently unknown. (Update, 2020health have recently released their supporters and funders). Click here.


2020 Health already has strong links to both the Conservative Party and the health insurance industry. Ms Manning herself was a formerConservative parliamentary candidate and has a background in health insurance. 2020health’s former chairman was Tom Sackville; a former Conservative minister under the Thatcher government is the Chief Executive of the International Federation of Health Plans, which represents one hundred private health insurance companies in 31 countries.


Aside from Earl Howe’s former patronage, four other peers are listedas current patrons - Lord Clement-Jones, Baroness Cumberlege, Lord McColl and Lord Rennard have connectionsto companies or organisations involved in private healthcare. The popularity in patronage might be because the House of Lords rules allow for patronage to take place without this having to be registered in their personal interests. But this patronage is used by 2020health to attract corporate members, who can become ‘Silver’ or ‘Gold Partners’ and receivean “opportunity to network with 2020health staff, patrons and associates”.


The identity of companies that have taken up this offer is as yet unknown, but what is known is that - despite their claims of independence - many of their reports are funded by big business. The policies these reports promote to “create a healthy society” may raise a few eyebrows.

In January 2010 - when Earl Howe was still both a patron of 2020 Health and opposition health spokesperson - 2020 produced a report sponsored by Bayer healthcare entitledResponsibility in healthcare: changing the culture’. The report advocated the end of free treatment for minor or for ‘repeat offenders’ under a section on ‘lifestyle’ illnesses. It suggested that electronic records could facilitate a penalty system for those who repeatedly turn up to A&E drunk or ‘high’. In addition, the report bemoaned that “the culture of people being deterred from seeking help because they are worried about ‘being a burden’ is fast fading”.

2020 Health is also a leading advocatefor ‘telehealth’ - the replacement of face to face contact with telephone and electronic monitoring devices. Its report, Healthcare without Walls was published just after the government had published its White Paper “Liberating the NHS” states that ‘the White Paper creates the environment in which the demand for telehealth-enabled services can be fostered”. The report was sponsored by private healthcare corporations including Tunstall (a leading provider in telehealth), Accenture, Vodafone, Pfizer and others. Despite 2020 Health’s stated emphasis on “research” and “evaluation” there have been a number of reports highlighting safety and cost problems with the telehealth model. The same report also pushes the use of personal health budgets…’ a move seen by manyas a step towards privatisation and an insurance model.

Manning’s letter to Howe reveals how she and her “consultative authors” lobbied Oliver Letwin hard on the point that David Cameron should be known as the “Technology PM”. This attempt to label Cameron “didn’t succeed” but Ms Manning is unperturbed. She ended her letter to the Earl by stating “we have to start firing up radical flares to attract investment and ensure resistance to change in the NHS is not tolerated.”


Such support for both big business, which funds their reports and Manning’s suggestions for David Cameron’s image suggests 2020health are anything but independent. Furthermore, the message turning the NHS into an economic arm of ”UK PLC” brings an end to the illusion that the Health and Social Care Act is about improving patient care.


This was co-published on Our NHS here.  

The 2020health membership just published and highlighted to me on 25th September 2013

Sunday, 28 October 2012

Reform think tank and their links to the Conservative Party


Reform calls itself independent. However the research below brings this claim into question in what appears to be the breaking of the Charity Commission rules for all charities to remain politically independent. Download as PDF

The 'charity’s' claim to independence is based on having one Liberal Democrat (Jeremy Browne) and two Labour members (Lord Warner and MP Frank Field) and a Conservative MP, (Julian Smith) on their advisory team. These however do not represent the overall dominance of the organisation towards the Conservative party, which can be seen by the powerbase, of the founders and trustees. The bullet points below represent a list of these connections.

  • All of the co-founders have links to the Conservative party.
  • Reform is recognised as part of the Conservative party movement by multiple medium including the Conservativehome. 
  • Two MPs to emerge from Reform both belong to the Conservative party
  • Two of the trustees have provided money to individuals in the Conservative party
  • Two of the trustees and a director have advised two Conservative MPs


Founders:
Three people set up Reform Research Trust in 2002: All have links to the Conservative party.

Andrew Haldenby, Nick Herbert and Patrick Barbour.

Andrew Haldenby: Director was formerly head of the Conservative Research Department (1995-1997), finishing up as Head of the Political Section with responsibility for briefing the Shadow Cabinet and Leader for key media interviews and appearances. Mr Haldenby is considered by the Telegraph to be the 59th most influential person on the right.[1]

Nick Herbert: MP is founder of Reform and a member of the Conservative party. Mr Herbert is considered by the Telegraph to be the 86thmost influential person on the right. [2]

Patrick Barbour: (No longer part of Reform) but politically active on the Eurosceptic right of the Conservative Party since at least the early nineties when he helped to fund the Bruges Group.  Patrick Robertson, The patriotic 'pipsqueak' of Bruges, The Sunday Times, 16-June-1991 – Gave the Conservative Central party £7,000 in 2005 and has since gone on to become a donor of UKIP. 

Trustees:
The Trustees of Reform according to their website are:
Stephen Hargrave, James Palmer and Jeremy Sillem. In the 2011 Full accounts, additional trustees were Rupert Darwell and Oliver Pawle.[3]

Rupert Darwall: Noted as a trustee in the 2011 full annual accounts is a Consultant Director of Reform, a freelance strategy consultant. He was previously Special Adviser to the Conservative Chancellor of the Exchequer Norman Lamont. [4]

Oliver Pawle: Currently the Honorary Treasurer. In the 2011 Full accounts it says: One of ‘The trustees who held office during the year’ was ‘Oliver Pawle’. Mr Pawle gave money to Dr Liam Fox for £5,000 on 2nd November 2009 to help run his office.[5]Mr Pawle is down as a trustee during this period. In 2009, he attended a Conservative premier dinner at the Dorchester.[6]In addition Mr Pawle advised Francis Maude on the possible structures and duties of the non-executive directors in a new structure to governance structures. [7]

Stephen Hargrave: Trustee and director, who according to the Electoral Commission gave £5,000 to Conservative MP David Davis in 2001 for a leadership candidate, this was prior to Reform becoming a charity.

MPs who worked for Reform before becoming MPs
Nick Herbert founded Reform and is now the Conservative MP for Arundel and South Downs.

Elizabeth Truss was a deputy director of Reform in 2008 and is now the Conservative MP for South West Norfolk

Other
Nick Boys Smith, consultant director - adviser on welfare policy to Conservative MP Peter Lilley when he was Secretary of state for Social Security before working at McKinsey & Co. [8]

Media stating Reform as part of Conservative movement
In July 2009, Cameron gave a speech to Reform think tank launching the Conservative policy on culling quangos.[9]

In July 2011 - David Cameron launched his plans for public service privatisation programme at the Think Tank Reform.[10]No other party launches policy from Reform

In January 2008 the Telegraph listed the top twelve think tanks in its opinion. It said of Reform: 'Political links. Good relations with Tories. Nick Herbert, Shadow Justice Secretary helped set it up.'[11]

In 2009, ConservativeHome.Com who are supporters of the Conservative party produced an article that talked about the ‘growth of Britain’s conservative movement’.  Reform is included in list of list of organisations they see as Conservative.[12]

In their 2011 report, Reform have a quote from journalist George Monbiot which says on their transparency: ‘The only right-wing think tank that did well was Reform.’[13]

In February 2012 - Will Heaven as Acting Deputy Comment Editor of The Daily Telegraph wrote: 'Today the think tank Reform, one that informs Conservative policy, pleads with the Government to "renew the commitment to NHS reform".'[14]

Reform had meetings "meetings of “leaders of the conservative movement … sharing ideas to try to pave the way to a new Tory government."

The Times claimed Reform had meetings of “leaders of the conservative movement … sharing ideas to try to pave the way to a new Tory government." [15]



Thursday, 4 October 2012

MPs and Lord's Financial Links to Free Market Think Tank

As part of a series of investigations looking into the free market think tank Reform, the financial links between our so-called public servants, corporations and Reform has brought into question whether Reform should be stripped of their ‘charity’ status.

Now Social Investigations has revealed the list of companies that give money to Reform in either donations or sponsorship who also are employing or have financial connections to our so-called public servants in key sectors of our society.

So far we have found out:

  • Reform’s involvement in promoting‘competition’ in the Health and Social Care bill during the ‘listening exercise’
  • The use of Chatham House Rules to hold high-level meetings on matters of promoting public service reform without minutes or knowing who was in attendance

Now below we can see the list of companies and their connections to MPs and Lords who also pay money to Reform and the amounts they paid in 2011. The amounts, though small for a corporation their size, allows them additional access to MPs and Lords at events, seminars, policy lunches, fringe conference events and promotion of policies in articles often via the Daily Telegraph and other media outlets.

The time has surely come to end their charity status.

Corporations; Links to MPs/Lords and amounts paid to Reform in 2011.
Lloyds – Lord Blackwell (Con): Non Executive director of Lloyds Banking Group plc Henry Bellingham (Con) – MP for North West Norfolk, Jonathan Djanogly MP (Con) for Huntingdon, Dominic Grieve, MP for Beaconsfield (Con) – all former members of Lloyds. Lord Leitch (Lab): Deputy Chairman, Lloyds TSB bank plc; advisor of Lloyds Banking Group plc; Trustee, Lloyds TSB Foundation for England and Wales. Baroness Scott of Needham Market (Lib Dem) Member, Lloyds Register Advisory Committee (unremunerated)
£50,000.00
McKesson - Lord Carter: (Lab) The head of the increasingly influential Competition and Cooperation Panel, is also the Chair of McKesson Information Solutions Ltd, which delivers I.T to “virtually every NHS organisation”
£42,500.00
SkyLord Wilson of Dinton (Crossbench; Con) – Non-Executive director of BSkyB) Mary MacLeod MP for Brentford and Isleworth (Con) received £7,000 sponsorship for Hounslow Volunteering Awards organized by the MP. Lord Howard of Rising (Con), Baroness Noakes Shares in BSkyB. Conservative party as a whole tried to get BSkyB bid passed.
£42,000.00
DANONE – Lord Lucas (Con) - Member, Pre and Probiotics Information Panel, Danone UK
£30,000.00
Aviva – Lord Sharman (Con) Is the chairman of Aviva, has directorship and Shareholdings in Aviva plc
£24,500.00
General Health Group:
(GHG) were purchased by Apax Partners  in 2006. Labour Peer, Lord Warner (Lab), was a former advisor to Apax Partners in 2007 when Apax had taken over GHG. Lord Warner is also a member of the Advisory Council for think tank Reform. The think tank received money from GHG for sponsorship and whose health policy for 2011 was stated as looking at: ‘The implications of greater efficiency for healthcare infrastructure, in particular hospitals.’

£24,500.00
Microsoft – Baroness Kingsmill (Lab) Member, Microsoft European Policy Council. Lord Watson of Richmond (Lib Dem) Non-executive Chairman, ICOMP and consultant to Microsoft.
£24,000.00
Serco – Lord Filkin (Labour) Public Affairs Advisor
£21,500.00
Prudential Lord Turnbull (Crossbench) Non-Executive director and shares
£20,000.00
KPMG - Lord Harris of Haringey (Lab) is a Senior Adviser and Lord Hastings (Crossbench) is the Global Head of Citizenship and Diversity for Global Tax.
£17,500.00
PA Consulting – George Freeman MP for Mid Norfolk (Con) Between November 2010 and November 2011 he provided strategic support to their Technological practice.
£15,000.00
PWC – Lord Ribeiro (Con) Adviser on hospital reorganization to PwC
£15,000.00
Telereal Trillium – Lord Griffiths of Fforestfach (Con) Category 2: Remunerated employment
£15,000.00
Airwave – Lord Harris of Haringey (Lab) Chair of Toby Harris Associates, whose clients include: Airwave Solutions
£12,500.00
G4S – Lord Condon (Crossbench) - Non-executive Deputy Chairman & Senior Independent Director. Lord Reid of Cardowan (Labour) Director Regional management.
£12,500.00
BG Group – Baroness Hogg (Con) - Senior Independent Director and holds shares.
£7,500.00
Cable & Wireless – Lord Robertson of Port Ellen (Lab) is a Senior International Adviser and has shares in the company
£7,500.00
GlaxoSmithKline 19 Lords and MPs have shares in GlaxoSmithKline.
£7,500.00
McKinsey – David Milliband MP for South Shields (Lab) received £10,000 from McKinsey and Co for a speech at a Global Business Leaders Summit in February last year. Also received a sum of £10,044 from the same company for travel expenses and accommodation in Singapore in March 2011. McKinsey & Co drew up loads of proposals that were accepted into the Health and Social Care bill. The consultancy giant also proposed the £20 billion cuts to the NHS accepted by the Coalition government. David Bennett the head of Monitor the new NHS regulator is a former employer.
£7,500.00
BP – Lord Jones of Birmingham (Crossbench) – Advisor. Lord Patten of Barnes - Member, International Advisory Board. Lord Robertson of Port Ellen - Deputy Chairman of Board & Chairman of Audit Committee, TNK-BP (Moscow-based joint venture in oil/gas) and an Adviser, BP plc. The Member receives a limited amount of secretarial assistance from BP plc. Lord Watson of Richmond is a consultant for BP plc.
£5,000.00
Circle – Mark Simmonds MP (Con) Special advisor. Baron Higgins of Worthing, a Conservative, holds in excess of £50,000 of shares in Lansdowne UK Equity Fund, backers of private hospital group Circle Holdings. Lord Watson is the Chairman of Havas Media UK, an integrated agency, 100% owned by Havas Media. In April 2011 - MPG Media Contacts won the integrated media planning and buying account for Circle Health. The account is worth just under £1m, according to MPG Media Contacts. Circle recruited Christina Lineen as head of communications following a two-year period as an advisor to Andrew Lansley. It is possible she is returning to government as an advisor to the new Secretary of State for Health Jeremy Hunt. Christina Lineen replaced Nick Seddon who is now a deputy director of Reform who has been heavily promoting the outsourcing of hospitals largely through the Telegraph. As well as being a member of NHS Partners Network, Circle has given money to Reform via sponsorship.
£5,000.00
Download the PDF here.

Thursday, 20 September 2012

Reform: A Charity or a conduit for privatisation?


Conference season is upon us, and this year as with every other, the three main parties of the UK political system will each be taking to the stage in an attempt to define their centrist differences. ‘Tis the season to be lobbying, and one organisation in particular will be on the fringes, acting as the go between for their corporate partners and the MPs they hope to persuade; their name is Reform.


Reform is a free market think tank, whose mission according to their website, is to ‘set out a better way to deliver public services and economic prosperity.’ They are also an official charity, although not in the traditional sense that you and I might think, i.e. ‘an organisation set up to provide help and raise money for those in need’ (OED). The charitable aims, in fact, appear to be more like an attempt to leverage public resources into the hands of the corporations who donate money to their cause.


Reform’s corporate partnersrepresent some of the most powerful companies in the country, including the likes of Citigroup, KPMG, GlaxoSmithKline and Serco. Partners are asked to donate £7,500 (or more if they choose), annually to the charitable Reform Research Trust and currently 31 companies across all the key sectors are only too willing to part with this amount. Such sums of money are of little consequence to these global companies, and in return their agenda of further outsourcing makes its way to government ears through newspapers, research reports and key events.

Reform claim that the need for corporate inclusion in their charitable work is to give these organisations a voice, as explained on their webpage‘corporates’:

‘We are
keen to involve corporate organisations in our research because their expertise is often left out of the Whitehall policy discussion.’

Is this true, are the multi-national companies really being left out of government discussions?

Take the global accounting giant, KPMG. Since the middle of 2010, they have participated in 33 government meetings, given written evidence multiple times and provided oral evidence on at least 4 occasions. KPMG guide policy, they are commissioned by various departments to produce reports and are currently one of the approved providers developing the Clinical Commissioning Groups, who are set to replace the Primary Care Trusts in 2013. This is not a voiceless outsider.

Not only are they already included in government policy-making, but they employtwo members of the House of Lords. Lord Harris of Haringey is a
Senior Adviser and Lord Hastings is the Global Head of Citizenship and Diversity for Global Tax.

In fact 9 of the companies who are listed as corporate partners of Reform employ members of the House of Lords on their payroll.
G4S, who are at the heart of government consideration for contracts on security and policing, have former Labour Secretary of State for Defence, Lord Reid, as a director. Since 2010, G4S have had 17 government meetings and 5 oral presentations. Serco, the public services giant, has billions of pounds worth of government contracts, and also has Lord Filkin as an advisor on public affairs. They have met the government on at least 36 occasions since 2010. The list goes on.

However, an annual donation is not the only way corporations can give money to Reform. One key element of their work is to set up meetings and events to bring together MPs and representatives from the various corporations willing to pay them money. In 2011, 68 different companies supported Reform, either via donation or sponsorship, totalling a weighty sum of £770,000. However, according to the Charity Commission website, their total income is over £1.25 Million.

This process is taking place over the course of the conference season. In order to participate in some of the key fringe events, which take place away form the main hall, corporations are paying money in the form of sponsorship in order to participate in events involving MPs.

Reform has produced a conference calendar of these eventsthat they will be attending alongside their corporate partners. On Monday 24th September, the new health minister, Norman Lamb, will be head of the table at a policy dinner sponsored by the UK’s biggest private hospital company, BMI Healthcare. General Healthcare Group, who own BMI Healthcare, gave Reform £24,500 in 2011 and are presumably covering the costs this time around.

In addition to this event, BMI are also included in invitation only events with Labour’s Shadow Minister for Care and Older People, Liz Kendall, and Conservative Health Select Committee Member, Chris Skidmore, on the shared topic of ‘Reforming health and care’.

BMI Healthcare came to the public’s attention recently when the Independentrevealed how the
executive director of the private BMI Meriden Hospital, Bernie Creaven, sent a letter instructing doctors to ‘artificially delay operations on non-paying patients to encourage them to pay fees.’

Reform is at the forefront of promoting the policy of outsourcing hospitals. In February this year, Circle became the first company to start running an NHS hospital after being given a 10-year contract to run Hitchingbrooke hospital in Cambridge. Just 6 months into its tenure, Circle produced a press release telling us how they have cut waiting times, improved care and delivered savings. This announcement was enough for the media, and the Telegraph in particular, to move into action; they hailed the hospital a success despite only 5% of the tenure being complete.

What followed was a sequence of articleswritten by Reform for the Telegraph that promoted the benefits of hospital outsourcing; a policy that will benefit both Circle Health, who were the former employers of Reform’s deputy director, Nick Seddon, and of course the UK’s largest hospital group, BMI Healthcare.

Healthcare companies are prominent at Reform’s fringe events, which is not surprising given the recent passing of the Health and Social Care Act, and the fact that 12 out of 31 of Reform’s corporate partners are from the health sector. However, they are by no means the only sector making use of Reform’s sponsorship programme.

Indeed, Reform’s corporate partners include, ABI, Aviva, Balfour Beatty, Benenden Healthcare Society, Bevan Brittan, BG Group, BVCA, Cable & Wireless, Capita, CH2M Hill, Clifford Chance, Citigroup, The City of London, Ernst & Young, GlaxoSmithKline, G4S, GE, General Healthcare Group, HP, ICAEW, KPMG, Maximus, McKesson, MSD, Optical Confederation, PA Consulting Group, Serco, Sodexo and Telereal Trillium - hardly a roll call of the downtrodden.

Reform claim to be a charity and the Charity Commission, for now at least, have accepted this. But the definition of charity in most people’s mind does not stretch to promoting the transfer of public resources into the hands of global corporations. Such a definition led the public services union GMB at the TUC congress to call Reform a ‘fake charity’. It’s not hard to see why, and it’s an issue that goes far beyond Reform. There is a clear need for the Charity Commission, the government and civil society to take a fresh look at exactly what “charity” is and decide which public goods are worthy of tax exemptions. Corporate lobbying is not charitable, it is profit seeking - and the taxpayer is subsidising it.

I wrote this article for Our Kingdom (Open Democracy) here.



Thursday, 23 August 2012

Reform - Setting the Agenda with Unknown Others

-->
Reform is a right-wing think tank that claims to be ‘independent’. Like many think tanks they have charity status, although when you look at their work, it is hard to see where the charitable part exists. They are setting the agenda for our public services in meetings that only they know who was in attendance.

Reform has and continues to be influential in the attacks on the NHS. A document written by the health lobby group the NHS Partners Network revealed Reform’s involvement in setting up meetings with key players of the NHS Future Forum and Monitor during the ‘health bill ‘pause’.

Reform were part of an ‘orchestrating of the Telegraph’s editorial during the Health bill ‘pause’, working together with the director of the NHS Partners Network, David Worskett.

Collaboration between the two makes sense when you look at their ties to the private healthcare industry. The NHS Partners Network has several members who have MPS and Lords on their payroll. These include Circle, who pay Mark Simmonds £50,000 a year for 10 hours a month as a strategic advisor. Another company are Care UK, whose owner, John Nash, donated money to run Lansley’s office when he was shadow health secretary.  Furthermore Care UK were purchased by Bridgepoint who have BBC Chief, Lord Patten of Barnes as an advisor.

Corporate partners
Reform, who remember are a ‘charity’, have multiple healthcare companies as their corporate partners. Current members are:  ABI, Aviva, Balfour Beatty, Benenden Healthcare Society, Bevan Brittan, BG Group, BVCA, Cable & Wireless, Capita, CH2M Hill, Clifford Chance, Citigroup, The City of London, Ernst & Young, GlaxoSmithKline, G4S, GE, General Healthcare Group, HP, ICAEW, KPMG, Maximus, McKesson, MSD, Optical Confederation, PA Consulting Group, Serco, Sodexo and Telereal Trillium.

General Healthcare Group own BMI Healthcare who are the UK’s largest hospital group. When Circle produced a press release showing how they have managed to ‘turnaround’ Hitchingbrooke hospital, Reform were very quicklyonto the case promoting the need for more hospital outsourcing. This is also because their Head of Communications, Nick Seddon used to do PR for Circle. He has since been replaced by Andrew Lansely’s former aide Christina Lineen.

One can’t help wonder what is charitable about this.

Further connections are available to Reform through Lord Carter who acts as Chair for McKesson Information Solutions Ltd, which delivers IT to “virtually every NHS organisation”. Lord Carter is The head of the increasingly influential Competition and Cooperation Panel. McKesson released a statement on this potential conflict of interest to the Guardian, stating: "Lord Carter steps down from any investigation where there is potential conflict of interest.”
Reform are also invited to meetings where minutes are not taken with Parliamentarians present. In April this year, as the government were in their so-called ‘listening period’, Reform hosted an event with Lord Warner as chair.

Lord Warner is a former adviser to Apax Partners, one of the leading global investors in the healthcare sector. Current director of Sage Advice Ltd. He works as an adviser to Xansa, a technology firm, and Byotrol, an antimicrobial company, which both sell services or products to the NHS” and was “paid by DLA Piper, which advised ministers on the £12 billion IT project for the NHS” projects that he was responsible for when he was a government minister.

The meeting was held under Chatham House Rules, which are a near century old rule that are used to supposedly allow participants to speak freely with fear of their words being highlighted in the media. What it means is that the public have no idea what was said as no minutes are taken and none of the participants can announce to the public who was there. Therefore information that comes out from these meetings is controlled.

Even so, despite this, thanks to a post-meeting feedback by Comunications head Nick Seddon, we know that competition was on the agenda, and that there will be a need for ‘constant political pressure if either competition or integration is to be achieved.’ Not only that, but true to their partners needs, hospitals were discussed and it was considered that: ‘Dealing with failing hospitals will either be through outsourcing, radical reconfiguration, or closure.’

Reform like using Chatham House Rules, which says much about their attitude towards transparency. In February 2012, they held another meetingwithout minutes, which spoke of the need to reform ‘fast and at scale.’ Thanks to the introduction, we know that Julian Le Grand was in attendance. In the same month, In a letter to the Guardian, in February this year, Mr Le Grand, stated: ‘With respect to the NHS bill, it is important that even those who generally prefer to rely upon their instuitions should avoid muddying the waters by accusing the bill of doing things that it does not, like privatising the NHS.’

Thanks to their feedback, we know that they spoke about whether there ‘should any areas of public service delivery be off-limits?’ The answer to this being, ‘in principle…“no”’. A further idea was the need to ‘go back to the idea behind Compulsory Competitive Tendering’. This former Conservative policy was introduced in the UK throughout the 1980s, but was dropped following resistance from local authorities and health trusts. The policy focused on price at the expense of quality and employment conditions, leading to a demoralised staff, that this should be being discussed a possibility is very worrying indeed.

So we know that Reform were holding meetings without minutes with key figures, though who many of them were remains unknown. They were part of the ‘orchestration’ of the Telegraph’s editorial, and were heavily promoting the benefits of outsourcing hospitals of which one of the corporate partners would be a beneficiary. They continue to push for the further role of private companies in the NHS many of whom are the partners and are linked to our so-called public servants. They call themselves a charity, which is patently absurd, and if we are to call ourselves a democracy, the use of organisations like this must not use the Chatham House Rules, which are used widely across political organisations.

Keep an eye out they are influencing the future of our public services.