Dear Steve,

May I congratulate you on your new position for inspectors for public practice. You are definitely qualified for this position, after you are GP, the training course organizer, a regional director of GP education, the head of the Royal College of Doctors, and the president of the future forum. I have also become a professor, and you won government prizes for your work. Wonderful profession, definitely.

Meanwhile, the training course organizer and GP remained full time.

We now see things from different views.

NHS is heading towards a crisis. All of those working on the front lines is that the service is greatly exaggerated, close to crises. I’m sure you received this message from many front lines workers. The government’s solution is to market the system, or the search for cuts to be performed (called a “Nicholson Challenge” or “efficiency savings”). As the chief inspector for public practice – a new post – you will be able to see this directly.

The profession is so frightening as I knew it at all. The reasons for this are complicated, but it is based on a number of factors: First, fixed and revenge sniping on the aspects of the media, as well as the Ministry of Health; Second, increasing control from the center through wage initiatives related to observation and the health of doctors by the functional GMC; Third, the lack of investment in public practice; Fourth, the impossibility of those in power to listen to anyone in the front line (except for a few supporters of the paper line in the paper Shires); Fifth, the service demand is increasing from demographic changes, as well as increasing general demand. I can continue (and some of my colleagues will refer to the regions on this list that I did not mention).

There are very few people who have the power and influence to influence the way we have led us by government policy since 1990 to this point. NHS was the unique selling point in this country, and in England it was destroyed at a rapid rate. We would like to save her if we can, and you are one of the people to whom the government listens.

You can achieve a lot by focusing on the role you want, instead of the summary you have. Inspection should be a neutral process, and it should make people who do it so independent and want to refer to errors, not only in the front line services, but how the policy caused it.

There are two types of roles that you can follow. The first is Chris WoodyidThe second is Stephen Tumam. They were both inspectors – one of the Offsted and one of the prisons.

Chris Woodhid was an enthusiastic funding of government policy, and was more extremist than most of the politicians. In my opinion, he was exaggerated because he was ready to do the dirty action of the government, and he says that the things that the ministers are thinking, allowing them to arrest themselves of the most exotic elements in the right -wing policy. The teachers hated as a hatred man.

Stephen Tumam searched prisons and told governments not only what the service could do to improve the system, but also government government to make decisions that made it difficult to manage the service. It was independent, brief on a large scale and strength for good in the system.

So, Steve, I want you to ask yourself if you are going to follow the Woodhead model or TUMIM model? The way they see your colleagues will be affected directly with what you make of this. You have an opportunity to make a big difference.

Can you do that?

Good greetings,

Dominic.