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

THE BIG QUESTION

The big question: should Sir David Nicholson resign?

  • 5 Comments

Under-fire NHS boss Sir David Nicholson says he is “absolutely determined” to stay in his job despite admitting failures over the Stafford Hospital scandal.

Sir David said the “NHS lost its focus” and he conceded that he “was a part of that”.

But he rebuffed calls for him to resign, saying he wanted to lead the NHS through coming health reforms.

Do you think Sir David should step down?

Add your comments and they could be published in NT.

  • 5 Comments

Readers' comments (5)

  • So, he admits to responsibility of being in charge of a system and 'promoting' that system which was directly responsible for the unnecessary deaths of what.....1200 people was it? Possibly many more?
    Now...what would happen if that sort of liability were levelled at the average nurse? Do we think that nurse would stand any chance of delivering on that the line "I'm absolutely determined to stay in my job"
    Probably hampered somewhat by a registration process which no manager has any accountability to so should DN resign...of course, will he...unlikely because there is no-one he answers to except a PM who has already lied to parliament and the nation, and who wants the denationalisation and privatisation of a huge resource for his 'friends'
    Not rocket science this politics malarky is it?!

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • It matters not whether he stays or goes. His reputation is like that if a politician. It doesn't make a difference when the political system fails. His style of management of a run of the mill DGH is no different than any other. Outside of the most famous and historic hospitals most hospitals struggle. Their bed stock cut because health economists and accountants decided to play fantasy management by pretending that optimal recovery can be worked out on paper.
    Ignoring that advances in healthcare occur with a declining population that requires more not less support and intervention, truly the 'scissors crisis' of this generation.

    This guy is a symptom of the NHS. We have, as executives people who have no business doing this job. They are career executives who know that their job is to exist within a structure they don't have to necessarily understand but those newsletters need a CEO and mission statements need a photo for their promises.
    He didn't decided to.make standards lower or worse but on the other hand there was nothing he could do as he doesn't really decided how much money and resources are allocated. Also just think how many of his underlings rushed to the bottom line when asked to make cuts etc. They probably did it dutifully and without a hesitation as indeed that is their job.
    This style of management is in no way unusual. He is oddly a scapegoat. He's acted no differently from any other CEO. To be honest if you know how.news works there was probably.something far more sinister being buried then this story. And the lack of real changes that will occur that are practical and that will raise standards are categorically lacking from the Francis report which is largely a great deal of hot air, empty rhetoric and fraudulent claims of being curative to the problems that were entirely and deliberately created by successive governments.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • is there anybody suitable and with his knowledge to see the NHS through the reforms if he goes? could the organisation might land up in a worse mess with less experienced leaders?

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Of course he should go. If he doesn't resign, then fire him and then pursue him legally over the deaths in mid-staffs. He was arrogant enough to accept the post, has been happy to preside over a knowingly-flawed system and has been paid handsomely for it. He is culpable. Are there to be no consequences here?

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • If we are to follow Francis' recommendations then he should stay

    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.