Your browser is no longer supported

For the best possible experience using our website we recommend you upgrade to a newer version or another browser.

Your browser appears to have cookies disabled. For the best experience of this website, please enable cookies in your browser

We'll assume we have your consent to use cookies, for example so you won't need to log in each time you visit our site.
Learn more

EDITOR’S COMMENT

'Safe staffing a priority but NMC stays hobbled'

  • 2 Comments

The publication of staffing levels is due on 24 June, and the information will be available on the NHS Choices website (page 2).

Amid all the criticism and calls for greater transparency, more detail, and more comparable data, let’s not forget this is a tremendous step forward. It is also an enormous recognition of the impact of nursing. People are using “nursing”, “staffing levels” and “safe” in the first sentence - and many of them aren’t even nurses. That’s a good start.

A year or two ago, you would never have thought it possible that hospitals would be running around trying to fill their wards with nurses. But now it’s a priority, thanks to the Royal College of Nursing, Unison and Unite, the Safe Staffing Alliance and the 1:4 group led by Mark Boothroyd and, dare I say it, Nursing Times and its surveys that have attracted a lot of media attention.

Not long ago, you would have seen hospitals eating into their nursing numbers to reduce their wage bill. Now, hospitals are struggling to fill vacancies, heading overseas to recruit and relying probably too heavily on bank and agency nurses.

While this is a complex subject and those in charge of publishing the data have to work out how to ensure it makes sense to the public, it is still a leap forward. People now recognise that staff numbers are important - and are talking about them openly.

There are many positives in all this. However, there were no positives in the Queen’s speech as far as the Nursing and Midwifery Council is concerned. The regulator got something of a kicking in the government’s response to Francis but promised it would do better if allowed to update its processes to make it more efficient.

The government, it seems, is happy to do the criticising but not happy to help the NMC fix the problems. Because it failed to include the draft Law Commission bill on the regulation of health professionals in the Queen’s speech, it will not be discussed by this parliament (page 6). So fitness to practise hearings will stay costly, cumbersome and clunky - by law. There is nothing the NMC can do about that without the government’s input. In not helping the NMC, the government is failing to help nurses - who will ultimately pay the price for this in yet another rise in registration fees.

So, yet again, the government swipes money from nurses’ pay packets. Ever get the impression it considers the nursing profession an easy target?

Jenni Middleton, editor

jenni.middleton@emap.com. Follow me on Twitter @nursingtimesed

  • 2 Comments

Readers' comments (2)

  • tinkerbell

    The demonising of nurses, the attack on nurses pay, terms & conditions, pensions etc., have been totally successful,this gov tested the water back in 2010 and now know we are an easy target. For them it's like shooting fish in a barrel, they will get away with much more unless we decide to stand up for ourselves.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • I hope the 4:1 recomendation is implemented accross the board. I work in the medium secure unit, Most patients are offenders and caring for them can be very challenging. Some have personality disorder which makes it even harder to manage with the staff level on most of the unit I work on. I hope we are not waiting for a bad incident to take place before implementing the recommendation.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

Have your say

You must sign in to make a comment

Please remember that the submission of any material is governed by our Terms and Conditions and by submitting material you confirm your agreement to these Terms and Conditions. Links may be included in your comments but HTML is not permitted.