Now here’s an interesting article: “Why commission a report if you’re determined to ignore its conclusions?”; the article was written by Mark Pack and was published on the Liberal Democrat Voice website.

The truth is now out in the open; or shall I say the ‘cat is out of the bag’. So, why have we had all this fuss; shouldn’t Andy Burnham have come clean in the first place, and said: “Yes, we all agree the new 111 service when it’s implemented will be cost effective and a better service than NHS Direct”. But, no you can’t do that when you’re opposition!

Please take time to read Mark’s article below:

Last August, the then Labour government commissioned a KPMG report into the future of NHS Direct (along with some other related NHS services). The report has been submitted to the current government, though not published.

So if Labour MPs and members were saying how the government must publish the KPMG report right away to see if it justifies the plans to migrate NHS Direct over to the planned 111 service, fair enough.

But for many in Labour to be demanding that the NHS Direct plans be abandoned without knowing the outcome of the KPMG report is tantamount to saying, “Who cares what that report the Labour government commissioned says? I’ve got my entrenched view and there’s no point looking at any evidence because my mind is firmly made up.” In which case, why bother with commissioning that KPMG report in the first place?

Bit of a waste of money really if you’ve decided you don’t care what it says. And the government could do itself some favours by publishing the report for us all to see.

(By an odd coincidence, by the way, being called “Tom” seems to be the main criteria for saner views on this issue from Labour as it’s Tom Harris MP who blogged this thoughtful piece and Tom Watson MP who has been digging trying to get to see the KPMG report.)