SCOTLAND'S top civil servant last night sparked a cross-Border row after a video emerged of him deriding the Coalition's NHS reforms and calling their core idea "enormously risky".
Permanent Secretary Sir Peter Housden told Scottish NHS managers that Conservative Health Secretary Andrew Lansley "could not persuade anyone" that having GPs commission patient care in England instead of health trusts was what was needed to improve the health service.
The £180,000-a-year mandarin, who as a member of the UK civil service is supposed to be politically neutral, suggested Lansley lacked a clear "story" about why the controversial changes were needed, and had failed to identify what action to take.
Housden referred dismissively to GP commissioning, the central plank of the Lansley reforms, as "a solution to no known problem".
Contrary to David Cameron's pre-election promise not to impose top-down reorganisation, the NHS plan was "such a big set of reforms it can be seen on an inter-galactic basis," he joked.
The comments were made in a training seminar called Stands Scotland where it did?, a video of which was put online by the Scottish NHS.
In it, Housden said the Scottish Government had developed a seven-point test for new policies called "Changing the World", which asked if they had vision, a recognisable story, clear actions and other necessary qualities.
Applying the test to the Coalition's NHS reforms, he said Lansley "got a tick" for a vision of a world-class health service free at delivery.
But he went on: "Thereafter Mr Lansley got into a bit of trouble. Had he got, secondly, a story to enable people to recognise where the NHS south of the Border had been and where it was going?
"And thirdly, could they recognise a set of actions that would help move them forward? Now here we come to GP commissioning – a solution to no known problem.
"Mr Lansley could not persuade anyone, actually, [that] the things that they perceived needed to happen in the NHS would be resolved by GP commissioning. People could see some of that argument, but to base a system on all of that seemed to be enormously risky."
The comments last night led to fresh criticism of Housden, who is already facing claims of "going native" for being too close to Alex Salmond. Last year, the Scottish leaders of the Labour, Liberal Democrat and Conservative parties complained to the UK Cabinet Secretary about Sir Peter's apparent enthusiasm for independence.
In his talk to NHS managers, Housden suggested people had voted SNP because they were ambitious for Scotland. He said: "I think the election result affirms a high level of ambition, a population that wants to see Scotland move forward."
Tory MSP Murdo Fraser said: "Senior civil servants should not be expressing views on party political matters north or south of the Border. Once again, Scotland's most senior civil servant is exposed for being far too cosy with Alex Salmond's separatist agenda."
But Scottish Labour leader Johann Lamont said: "I think on this issue Peter Housden has caught the mood of people not just in Scotland, but across the whole of the UK. The Tory reforms would be a disaster for the NHS."
A Scottish Government spokesman said: "A key part of Sir Peter's role as head of the Scottish Government civil service is to discuss important issues in public policy.
"On this occasion he was illustrating the Scottish Government's approach by contrasting it to the very different nature of NHS reform elsewhere in the UK."
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article