4 Jul 2012
Last updated during 10:16 ET
Freedom of information specialist
For years a Nursing and Midwifery Council (NMC) has been unwell to cope with a series of complaints it has to hoop into either sold nurses or midwives are fit to practise, heading to prolonged delays.
Yesterday it was a theme of a sardonic report from a Council for Healthcare Regulatory Excellence (CHRE), that cursed a NMC for – among other failings – a longstanding record of difficulty of purpose, miss of pure vital direction, unsuitable governance, lunatic operative relationships, deficient leadership, diseased business planning, inner informative problems, bad financial stewardship, dangerous government information, unsure IT systems, and scantily pure decision-making.
The CHRE news refers 7 times to what it describes as a reserve of cases faced by a NMC (if you’re prone to check for yourself, one of these is spelt as “back log”).
But what a NMC will not apparently accept is that a problems volume to carrying a “backlog” of complaints to arbitrate on.
When one of my colleagues make a leisure of information ask 3 months ago for papers regulating a tenure “backlog”, she was told that “the information requested is not held” – since “the NMC does not have a reserve of cases.”
Today an NMC orator admitted: “We recognize that not all of a cases are being progressed as fast as we would wish or expect.”
But she fit a FOI reply: “We positively mount by a response that was given in a FOI request. There are a series of cases that are actively being progressed. Backlog is not a word we select to use. There is no reserve – we have a caseload.”
Instead what a NMC does have apparently is a vast series of what it prefers to call “historic” cases.
Source: Article Source