A PICTURE OF JERSEY.

By Popular Request.

I have been producing this blog for a few months now and I get a tremendous amount of feedback from people in Jersey – 98% of which has been extremely supportive.

Many people have asked me if I would post a notorious open-letter I wrote on the 1st February 2007.

This pre-dates the political aspects of the child abuse disaster – so it doesn’t deal with that subject – but I’m sure we could all use some entertaining diversions right now.

But what the satirical letter does is provide a kind of ‘beginners guide’ to Jersey politics and the machinations and history of power in this island.

It is an accurate depiction of the arrogance, megalomania, moral turpitude and stupidity of Jersey’s oligarchy.

I say a notorious letter, because – believe it or not – the writing of a four-page piece of political satire was deemed to be some kind of “threat to society”. Really – I’m not kidding.

This is another of those ‘You Just Couldn’t Make It Up’ moments.

The issuing of my open letter caused an emergency meeting of Jersey’s Council of Ministers – of which I used to be a member – and led to me being arraigned before the Jersey parliament’s ‘Privileges & Procedures Committee’.

Perhaps I’ll write about the politics of that episode in another post.

But, for now, I reproduce the open-letter. It was written in response to political and personal attacks on me by Richard Brocken. For further information concerning the delightful Mr. Brocken check-out my post, “Of Chancers & Spivs”, which can be read here: –

http://freespeechoffshore.nl/stuartsyvretblog/of-chancers-and-spivs/

But the open letter published below deals with a variety of local issues and characters – which, obviously, won’t be familiar to those who don’t know Jersey.

But I’m still pretty confident that average reader will get a flavour of, ‘How Things Work In Jersey’ from my “subversive” screed.

For example – as you’re reading the letter – remember – the Jersey establishment seriously contemplated a ‘censure-motion’ against me in the island’s parliament for having written it.

Yes – they really are that stupid.

Enjoy.

Stuart.

Senator Stuart Syvret
Minister, Health & Social Services
E-mail: st.syvret@gov.je

1st February 2007

AN OPEN LETTER TO MR RICHARD BROCKEN
BY SENATOR STUART SYVRET

Dear Ritchie

Thanks for the letters you had published in the JEP on the 23rd December and the 18th January. I was beginning to get a little bored since my good friend Mr Boothman retired from writing his column. Anyway, I was reminded that I should reply when I heard Don Filleul on the BBC Radio Jersey phone-in programme this Sunday. Mr Filleul suggested I was a communist, which is similar to your assessment of me. Well, when people of Don’s calibre – the mastermind behind the steam clock – speak, it pays to listen. It’s always stimulating and beneficial to receive constructive criticism, and in reflecting on what you wrote I am beginning to think you are, in many ways, correct. However, before going on to confess the error of my ways, I should state that, contrary to your assertions, I have never been anything other than totally honest in my election manifestos. A rather quaint anachronism, I know, but these habits are hard to break. The issues and policies I work to address were openly declared in my manifesto at election time. There was nothing ‘closeted’ or ‘cloaked’ about them. Unlike – it has to be said – the sub-text to your letters which you rather unsportingly left veiled.

You failed to mention in your attacks on me that the Health & Social Services department, whilst under my leadership, has refused to enter into a multi-million pound public-private partnership with you to enable the construction of a private hospital on the site of your Stafford Hotel. I know, I know – it must seem so unfair when we readily engage in public-private partnerships with other businesses, such as the partnership with Dandara that enabled us to deliver the new dental clinic, and the partnership with the owners of the Sandringham Hotel site which will also be very beneficial; working with independent care homes; forming partnerships with the local GP community and so on. But I’m sorry Ritchie, the consistent and professional advice given to me and the old Health & Social Services Committee was that the particular deal with you involving your Stafford Hotel site just didn’t stack up from a public interest perspective. Ritchie, as your own advisers told you, your scheme was only viable if the public “shared the risk”. Your scheme was economic only if it could piggy-back on the many decades of heavy investment by the taxpayers of Jersey in their hospital and its infrastructure. Had the project gone ahead, one of the main results would be your venture creaming off the private health work, thus depriving the General Hospital of an important source of income. This income loss would have to be made up by the tax payer, who would also be continuing to maintain the General’s emergency services which your unit would turn to at times of complications and crisis. Not a good deal, I’m afraid, Ritchie – it just didn’t make any sense.

I also think that those currently investing in genuine stand-alone private facilities would be less than happy at the prospect of your venture gaining an unfair market advantage through a partnership with the General Hospital.

So Ritchie, whilst we are never going to agree on your private hospital proposal, there are so many other ways in which I now see that people like Don Filleul and you have been right all along.

You are certainly correct when you say that Norman Le Brocq was a communist. I had many conversations with Norman and whilst I didn’t agree with his political philosophy, I regarded him – as did many people including the late Sir Martin Le Quesne – as a man of integrity and principle who worked tirelessly for the ordinary people of Jersey. Ritchie, people like Sir Martin and I may have thought Norman was a decent, if philosophically misguided, man, but I recognise now that we were mistaken. The ‘truth’, of course, is revealed in the Jersey Evening Post reportage of those post-war decades. When looking at archive JEP material (always an accurate historical source, don’t you find?) it becomes clear that Norman was, in fact, Joseph Stalin incognito with a battalion of T34 tanks hidden in Grands Vaux woods. When his moment arrived he would surely seize the tea factory and re-name it Red October.

You know, Ritchie, thinking about Norman reminds me of the eulogies heaped upon him by the JEP and assorted oligarchs when he died. It seemed not to matter one jot that the JEP – the house-journal of the island’s establishment – had spent decades in a spittle-flecked swivel-eyed mania of paranoia and hatred whilst trying to destroy him lest his policies compromise the money-minting opportunities of the odd landlord, lawyer or estate agent. If anyone notices when I kick the bucket, I do hope the JEP isn’t so completely shameless as to print any encomiums of that kind about me. Such stinking hypocrisy is always a deeply unedifying spectacle, don’t you find, Ritchie?

So, I now suspect you and Don are right. My politics might indeed have been ‘extremist’. But you and I can hardly be objective judges of that question, can we? All we can do is explore the issues and let others compare and contrast.

I now see that the mistake I was making all along was to consider where my policies might fall on the political spectrum of, say, the UK or other European countries, and reaching the conclusion that my views were entirely mundane by the standards of western democratic discourse. By way of contrast, the “mainstream” policies of the Jersey oligarchy often struck me as being off-the-radar-screen in terms of stupidity, rapacity and unsustainability. You know the kind of stuff – placing a regressive sales tax on basic food, education and health care costs whilst minimising the tax bills of the rich, chucking 500,000 tonnes of toxic incinerator ash into sea-porous land reclamation sites, blowing a total of nearly £50 million of taxpayers money in capital overspends, setting a minimum wage that doesn’t even reach 45% of the median wage, refusing to have a windfall tax on the spectacular profits of property speculators, allowing thousands of small business proprietors to dodge their social security obligations through the mechanism of paying themselves the bare minimum whilst their companies accumulate the profit thus leaving the taxpayer to pick up the shortfall, abusing migrant workers by charging them £120.00 per week to rent damp and stenching hovels, letting the gold-rush decades pass whilst accumulating a ‘strategic reserve’ that wouldn’t even meet 12 months of public sector costs, – etc etc. I could go on and on, but I’m sure you get the picture.

I admit my error; I used to see such things as the manifestation of disjointed chaos, institutional inadequacy and the foetid miasma of an environment completely in thrall to short-term business interests. I now recognise what everyone else has always known. These achievements are the marvellous consequence of a brilliant political epoch.

I can now see that suggestions like capping the tax bill of billionaires at a maximum liability of £100,000 are a jolly good idea. I mean, why charge them more when we can tax medicines, bread, children’s clothes and school fees instead?

You were quite right; my comments about politicians buying their way into office were scurrilous. I deserve to be thrown out of the States for another 6 months. I guess I was just allowing the resentment get to me; of fighting elections against people who might have spent £30,000 of their “sponsors” money on their campaigns. I had worried that big businesses and the rich – who have multi-million pound interests riding on the outcome of Jersey elections – would readily “sponsor” the “right” candidates. But, on reflection, I’m sure that doesn’t happen – does it, Ritchie?

Yes, Jersey has got it right in not legislating for election expenditure. OK, OK, I grant you that all of the rest of the established democratic world embraced such laws decades ago, believing that democracy should take place on a level playing field. But I agree, it is the rest of the world which is extremist and Jersey stands alone as a beacon of moderation, rectitude and probity. Let’s face it, Guernsey has laws controlling election expenditure – so it must be a mistake.

I’m sure all these other jurisdictions have got it wrong and that extravagant campaigns just don’t affect the outcome of elections. I am sure that, as they went into the voting booth, the voters of St. Helier number 2 district simply thought “Right, if we elect that nice Mr MacLean, of the ‘Seven Angry Men Party’ he will oppose all that bleeding-heart-liberal nonsense about GST exemptions. Medicines, medical services and children’s clothing must not be exempt from the tax! What we need is a representative who understands that you must tax the poor to help the poor.” He has certainly met these expectations, so don’t let anyone say that you can’t rely on politicians. Well – OK, I didn’t actually read his manifesto, but I’m sure he must have overtly promised to stamp on all this pinko nonsense so we can continue to benefit from the occasional crumb that might ‘trickle down’ from the tables of the rich.

Ritchie, thanks to you and Don I’ve been reflecting on my political views and maybe I was an extremist. I mean, what can I have been thinking of, moaning about the fact that a rich person can make a £50 million capital gain – that’s £50 million – and pay not one penny – that’s not one penny – of tax on that sum, whilst the States of Jersey puts tax on bread, insulin and bandages. I mean, just fancy; imagining that it’s OK to take 1% in tax off of someone who has just made £50 million. Well – it is just communism, isn’t it? Tax multi-millionaires instead of taxing bread and apples? Next thing you know I’ll be suggesting that millionaires with £2 million yachts in the taxpayer funded marina should pay some duty on their marine diesel or that commercial property speculations should be taxed a little instead of children’s clothing, basic food or education.

What can I have been thinking? To suggest taxing the mega-rich a little – when we can perfectly well put a tax on the incontinence pads of the infirm instead? Well – I ask you! – It’s just political correctness gone mad, ain’t it?

Thank heavens your letters and Don’s comments have brought me to my senses and made me see such policies as the extremist crypto-commie nonsense they were. I shall now embrace the Laffer curve (appropriately weighted for local maxima, naturally) – let the rich pay no tax – no, forget that; let’s pay the rich to be here. As Leona Helmsley said “only little people pay taxes.” Well, OK – she was jailed shortly afterwards, but that was because governments just don’t understand the exigencies of the wealth creators, do they? If your letters hadn’t brought me to my senses I would still be getting cross about taxes aimed at the poor, the inability of the States to pay for the latest cancer drugs, bread-line families, failure to pay our nurses sufficiently and people paying £120 per week to rent one–room wretched hovels.

Perhaps now that I have publicly recanted my misguided political views, maybe I’ll be offered a non-executive directorship of a bank or accountancy firm and then sit in political judgment on the institutions – err – ‘regulatory issues’. I mean, this was, after all, standard political practice for decades. And, let’s face it, if it was good enough for the colossus-like ‘Elder Statesmen’ of the ‘Good Old Days’, then it’s certainly good enough for me.

As your first letter said, I’ve “finally got the message”. I’ll have to admit that completely misjudging what the public want is a pretty big failure for a politician. I‘ve done it so many times I scarcely know where to begin my disencumbrance. How about the Waterfront? Clearly, the ‘silent majority’ of people in St. Helier actually wanted their ancient beach to be covered by a giant toxic waste dump and covered with structures copied from Birmingham circa 1974. Perhaps that historic view to Elizabeth Castle was just a nuisance; an obstacle in the way of more car parking? Yes, I confess I just didn’t “get it” that when they spoke of creating a “unique” waterfront, what they meant was we would – uniquely – have the only multiplex cinema on earth with prime-site sea views. Now I just shake my head and think ‘how could I have been so foolish?’

But just think, Ritchie, if I do step down in a couple of years, an additional seat will be available. Why don’t you run for it yourself? I think you would get in easily. Just put on some ‘salt-of-the-earth, working-man’ shtick – like one or two of your political friends – and there you go. Hell, let’s face it; if the voters of a district like St. Helier number 2 can be persuaded that just who they need to understand and represent them is a multi-millionaire property merchant with a country estate in England then anything is possible.

And just think of the opportunities: if you became ‘Senator Brocken’, you could pursue your interest in opposing “extremist political doctrines” and seek to establish a “House Un-Jersey Activities Committee”. There would surely be no shortage of support in the States with many members willing to serve on it. Just imagine the questioning you could lead: “Did you ever know or did you ever speak to Norman Le Brocq?” “Do you or did you ever believe that there should be a tax on the capital gains of multi-millionaires instead of a tax on dressings for the ulcerated legs of pensioners?” “Have you ever thought, or associated with those who thought, that it might be reasonable to expect the wealthy to pay a little more tax before we tax the food in the mouths of the poor?” “Do you, or have you ever, read the Guardian?” Anyone answering yes to any of these questions could be safely marked down as a dangerously subversive threat to society and hounded out of employment and home – as has actually happened in the past. And, let’s face it, this wouldn’t be too hard to achieve as you would have the enthusiastic support of the JEP, the island’s only “newspaper”. After all, this would be small beer to a publication which has exhibited such fulminating, crazed and vicious paranoia as to reveal, in an editorial comment, the mental health history of an individual whose political activism happened to displease the bosses. Though the timing of this incident was some years ago, the ‘standard’, if that’s the right word, remains the same. I used to think it was axiomatic that only weak and silly little men ever get to become editors of the JEP; tremulous poltroons who could be relied upon to service the interests of Jersey’s landlords, bosses and used car salesmen. I was wrong about this too. I now recognise that successive editors have all been journalistic titans – fearlessly striding forth, girded for battle on behalf of truth and justice whilst guided by the finest traditions of the Fourth Estate.

So Ritchie (and this is secret, OK? Just between you and me) I used to constantly worry about the future of Jersey. Griped by an existential crisis, I would think ‘what will we do in Jersey if things get difficult? We’ve seriously over-developed our environment, spread pollution, squandered our collective inheritance, dissolved our quality of life, exploited large cohorts of the population, accumulated terrifying pension scheme debts – and have saved not so much as one year’s public expenditure to show for all of this.’ I used to lay awake at night thinking ‘things might get very hard for us in the next five to ten years’; that the tower blocks, the traffic jams and the concrete might simply be simulacrums of success; that we had absolutely no plan of any description to deal with issues such as peak oil and the resultant global economic and societal crisis. I used to fear that the architects of this destiny would – when the end of our hallucinated economy arrives – jet off to luxurious climes to their first, second, or fifth “holiday” home, having ‘cashed their chips’ and safely sent on their millions in advance – leaving a bitter, wrecked and betrayed community behind.

But I have put such fears behind me now and am going to send in my membership application to the Institute of Directors. I recognise that we have been led by geniuses and that there is simply no possibility of any of these bad things happening – and even if they did, every scion of the rentiers, every tax exile, every local millionaire and every thrusting entrepreneur will remain here – standing shoulder to shoulder with the rest of us; using their fortunes to succour the poor and ease the suffering; ready to save the day with that colossal business skill, initiative and resourcefulness that we have always been so proud of in Jersey. OK, I grant you that slave-trading is illegal these days, so it won’t be so easy this time around – but I’m sure we will think of something.

Regards

Stuart

PS: If I disregard the professional advice and go for the private hospital deal on your Stafford Hotel site, will you pay towards my election campaign if I ever run again?

Cheers.

25 thoughts on “A PICTURE OF JERSEY.

  1. Anonymous

    Roger Holland had attained the rank of vingtenier
    A former Jersey honorary policeman who admitted sexual assaults on girls has been jailed for two years.

    Roger Arthur Holland, 42, admitted assaults on eight girls over 19 years.

    The offences involved touching girls inappropriately outside their clothes. Three took place during his time as an honorary officer between 1992 and 1999.

    Sentencing the former vingtenier at the Royal Court, Deputy Bailiff Michael Burt highlighted the repeated offences and abuses of trust Holland displayed.

    Senior officer

    Holland had been awaiting sentence for three counts of indecent assault on children when he asked for a further five offences to be taken into consideration in March.

    He was aged between 15 and 34 when he carried out the assaults.

    Jersey has 12 honorary police forces, one for each of the island’s parishes. Officers are unsalaried, but can work with the island’s States police.

    In 1992, despite stating on his application form that he had been convicted of an indecent assault against a young girl in 1986, he was elected as a constables officer and sworn in.

    He later went on to be promoted to a senior position, attaining the rank of vingtenier, the second most senior in the island’s volunteer force.

    Strong message

    Holland, who is originally from the island, but has also lived in Northamptonshire, was previously jailed for two years in 2001 for two other counts of indecent assault committed before 1992.

    The Jersey Honorary Police Association said lessons had been learned as a result of the case.

    Mitch Couriard, of the association, said: “The process has tightened up and I can reassure you that, providing someone has got a record, we can produce it. If someone hasn’t got a record, we can’t stop them.”

    The States of Jersey Police said the sentence sent a strong message to anyone intent on committing offences against children.

    The force said that everything would be done to seek justice for victims, no matter how long ago the offences were committed.

    ONE DOWN HOW MANY TO GO????

    Reply
  2. Frank

    Just after I clicked onto your blog ,in one of those wonderful coincidences , your resonant tones were heard behind me on Newsnight on my television in the Roger Holland case.
    I live in the England and the island of Jersey is beginning to resemble something out of the Wicker Man . Could you please tell us if there are plans to sacrifice Lenny Harper to save the island from famine.
    On a more serious note do you think that a paedophile ring has existed in Jersey ? Or is it that due to a closed curtain state of mind , these perverts have been able to get away with their crimes.
    I am a great believer in ‘ If it looks like a duck ,walks like a duck and quacks like a duck , it probably is a duck ‘ , however hard it is to believe.
    I realise that your response may put you in an invidious position but as the man on the spot I would love to hear your opinion on this.
    I am generally of a conservative state of mind and would probably disagree on 90 % of what you believe in , but please keep up the good work on this.

    Reply
  3. Anonymous

    Stuart

    Private hospital raises some interesting questions.

    When you were Minister of Health were you given the figures about how much private practice the hospital consultants did?

    Do you know the ratio of private to public patients seen by hospital consultants?

    Did you know how much money hospital consultants make in private practice?

    Think the public might be interested in this information after all they are paying their salaries.

    Reply
  4. Anonymous

    Politicians, Senior Civil Servants, Child molestors take note:

    “Your children are not your children. They are the sons and daughters of Life’s longing for itself. They come through you but not from you, and though they are with you yet they belong not to you.”

    Kahlil Gibran

    Reply
  5. Anonymous

    There have been two convicted paedophiles employed at Overdale hospital in the last 10 years

    Has this ever been investigated?

    It seems that there is an alarming lack of rigour of recruitment in the health service

    Reply
  6. Anonymous

    Stuart
    Somebody asked the question about the ratio of private to public work.
    There is nothing wrong with private practice. It provides choice and income to the hospital. It does have to be carefully managed so that private practice doesn’t come before public services.

    The standard health answer to the question will be about 35%.

    The 35% figure arises from all clinical activity. However this is not a good ratio indicator

    Remember only the consultant grade of doctors are able to provide private work in the hospital.

    To get an accurate figure you need to look at the consultant activity only.
    So if a consultant surgeon does 100 operations a year and 50 of them are private, his figure is 50%.
    If the registrar figures are taken into account, eg 400 the ratio changes to 10%.

    Some area attract more private work than others.

    If you are interested, the NHS only allows 10% ratio for consultant work but this is Jersey so the NHS standards do not apply.

    Reply
  7. jim browne

    Jersey to me sounds like an Island where people are trapped by a Sect, its just like the Series The Prisoner which was on some years ago.

    You talk out of term and you are banned from the island, you must do what they say, you must vote in the way they tell you, run by the rich for the rich, to make them even richer.

    Remember people of Jersey, you can fight back with the ballott box, or you will never get away from the Sect.

    Reply
  8. Anonymous

    Stuart

    You turned down the Stafford hotel for the reasons stated.

    Can we please open up the debate on private practice.

    For the Islander there is no choice, The consultant is the same whether you pay or not.

    If you are public, is it the luck of the draw if and when you see a consultant. Alternatively, if you bring your wallet do you see a consultant within 24 hours with an added bonus that he’ll ring you at home just to make sure you are ok and still able to make bank withdrawals!

    Who monitors private practice in Jersey and who scrutinises the consultants’ public activity

    I understand that the top salary is about £130K to provide a public service to the people of Jersey.

    How much do they make on top of that from private practice?

    Is the private practice done in public time?

    Does private work take precedent over public

    Why do the health service management collude in health monopolies? are there any options?

    Is hospital management actually in charge or do the consultants exert undue influence to protect their private practice?

    Remember you must always protect your privates!

    Reply
  9. Anonymous

    Stuart

    Be careful about looking too carefully at private practice. Someone got very close before and is no longer working for H&SS.

    Reply
  10. Anonymous

    Stuart

    Previous blogger has set out how the private practice scam works. (though I think he means 40 not 400)

    What we need now are the uncontaminated figures to know what is going on.

    Why are these not in the public domain?

    Reply
  11. Anonymous

    Stuart,
    Please could you publish your full Christmas speech in your blog. I’m sure its wording will now be starting to haunt a few States Members !!!
    Keep up the good work !!!

    Reply
  12. Anonymous

    Stuart

    Choice, what choice? Unless they mean you have the choice to pay if you want to see a consultant otherwise it will probably be a registrar.

    How many of the consultants working for H&SS do private practice?

    How many do only public work?

    Is this information available?

    Is this yet more evidence of a culture of secrecy and concealment?

    Reply
  13. Anonymous

    I have read the post and would ask you if you would like to come on to the UK mainland to set up a new political party.

    Jersey is not alone in taxing the poor to help the rich. Robin Hood in reverse.

    The UK is about the same these days with the neo con agenda winning all the time. What ever happened to fairness, justice and the redistribution of wealth?

    We have the super rich spivs who have their own laws and get away with just about anything. Governments bow and scrape to them and permit them to behave as they choose. At the same time, the underprivileged are ground into the dirt. It is a crime to be poor these days.

    Jersey may have its own corrupt system which being an island will be more difficult to challenge. The powers that be will make sure that they retain the privileges. They will put the systems in place to perpetuate these powers for themselves.

    I have lived on the Isle of Wight and it is very similar. Close knit oligarchy which is self perpetuating.

    Freemasons are very influential on the Isle of Wight too. They like islands as they can control everything easily. Use power for their own advantage.

    Think about it as these problems are not unique to Jersey, it is the way of the whole of the UK.

    Reply
  14. Anonymous

    It would seem that some bloggers have attempted to get off the subject at hand.

    This blog if my memory serves correctly this is a blog to monitor the unfolding child abuse scandal involving high ranking members of the Jersey establishment and their inability or choice not to take the requisite action to stamp it out, as for possible corruption of Doctors and health officials can surely wait until the subject for which this blog is concerned is fully explored and addressed.

    Reply
  15. Anonymous

    Stuart

    In Jersey the health service is joined to social services.

    Senior civil servants include doctors, nurses, social workers and hospital and social services management.

    Child abuse is an alarming and frightening subject. So too is corporate manslaughter.

    The medical profession in jersey is not regulated.

    You don’t even have to have pulse to be registered to practice medicine or dentistry in Jersey

    Reply
  16. Anonymous

    Re Consultants private practise.

    Yes, all consultants are ‘obliged’ to have a private practice, they are only paid for 4 shifts out of 5 and the other shift is for their private practise. People who have insurance use it to jump the 12week wait for a public appointment. However, I can state that if a patient is in need of an urgent appointment, say for a suspected cancerous mass, the consultant will see them on an urgent basis and there will always be space for these. Most consultants, but certainly not all, get a nice little earner from private practice, but that’s cool, I think their worth it. The majority of the time they are on the coal face doing an incredibly stressful job and of course they need registrars to help them with running a busy public clinic; the fracture clinic can sometimes have 60 patients in one clinic, a lot for one person to see. So lay off the workers.

    Reply
  17. Anonymous

    “Everything secret degenerates, even the administration of justice; nothing is safe that does not show how it can bear discussion and publicity.”

    Lord (John Emerich Edward Dalberg) Acton,

    Reply
  18. Anonymous

    Stuart

    Lay of the workers!
    Don’t ask questions!
    We all do a marvellous job!
    Our service is second to none!

    Isn’t this the same argument that is used in the childrens service?

    Well who could tell what goes on in public services.

    You have to ask the workers but it’s not an option. Refer to Mike Pollard’s email.

    This is Jersey!

    Reply
  19. Anonymous

    I say lay off the workers, I mean in the health service and its the only service I know. The abuse that has gone on in the past, I would imagine, very few of the ‘coal face workers’ know about. That abuse is only for ‘the chosen few’. But that’s another subject, don’t mix up the health service with any other, I do believe that HSS is more transparent, (probably due to SSS)

    Reply
  20. Anonymous

    I am a worker, and I’m telling you from the front line that most, and I mean a majority do the job they are doing is because they do care,I can only speak about the hospital, the biggest problem is its run by the civil service, the consultants should have more say, but management ain’t listening.

    Reply
  21. Anonymous

    My mum came out of hospital with a huge pressure sore on her behind

    You cant complain – the staff just say their busy

    Nobody in that hospital cares

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.