NHS Future Forum members

Members of the NHS Future Forum listed alphabetically by surname.

For more information on how the Forum will work, see About the NHS Future Forum.

A

Adebowale, Lord Victor Chief Executive, Turning Point
Alessi, Dr Charles Senior GP Partner, The Churchill Practice
Alltimes, Geoff Chief Executive, Hammersmith and Fulham Borough Council and NHS Future Forum Lead – Patient and Public Involvement
Atherton, Dr Frank – President of the Association of Directors of Public Health, and Director of Public Health, North Lancashire Teaching PCT

B

Bailey, Vicky Principia, Partners in Health, Nottingham
Brearley, Sally Patient representative
Bremner, Sheila Chief Executive, Mid Essex PCT
Brown,  Simon Huntington GP Consortia pathfinder lead
Bubb, Stephen Chief Executive, Association of Chief Executives of Voluntary Organisations and NHS Future Forum Lead – Choice and Competition

C

Chapman,  Hilary Chief Nurse, Sheffield Teaching Hospitals

D

Dutt, Ratna Chief Executive, Race Equality Foundation

F

Farmer, Paul Chief Executive, Mind
Fawcett, Dr Derek Consultant Urological Surgeon, The Royal Berkshire NHS Foundation Trust
Field, Professor Steve Practising GP Birmingham; Immediate past Chairman of Council, Royal College of GPs; and Chairman of National Inclusion Health Board. NHS Future Forum Chair
Fish, Professor David Managing Director UCL Partners Academic Health Science Centre

G

Gibb, Moira Chief Executive London Borough of Camden; Chair, Social Work Task Force; former social worker
Goldring, Mark Chief Executive, Mencap

H

Hay, Peter Strategic Director, Adults & Communities, Birmingham City Council; and Vice President, Association of Directors of Adult Social Services
Hughes-Hallett, Thomas Chief Executive, Marie Curie

K

Kerr, David Professor of Cancer Medicine, Oxford University
Killian, Joanna Chief Executive, Essex County Council

L

Lelliott, Paul Consultant Psychiatrist, Oxleas NHS Foundation Trust
Leon-Villapalos, Clare Intensive Care Nurse, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust
Long, Chris Chief Executive, Hull PCT
Lowe-Lauri, Malcolm Chief Executive, University Hospitals of Leicester NHS Trust

M

Marshall, Claire Head of Professions, Heatherwood and Wexham Park
McCarthy, Bill Chief Executive, Yorkshire and Humber SHA
McKeever, Anthony Bedfordshire and Bexley PCTs
McLean, Kathy Physician and Medical Director, East Midlands SHA and NHS Future Forum Lead – Clinical Advice and Leadership
Moore, Julie Chief Executive, University Hospitals Birmingham NHS FT and NHS Future Forum Lead – Education and Training

N

Nightingale, Peter President, Royal College of Anaesthetists

O

O’Riordan, Dermot Medical Director, West Suffolk Hospital

P

Pall, Niti Practising GP Smethwick; and Chair & Clinical Lead, West Midlands third wave pathfinder

R

Riordan,  Tom Chief Executive, Leeds City Council
Rogers, Cllr David Chair, Local Government Association Community Health and Wellbeing Board

S

Selbie, Duncan Chief Executive, Brighton and Sussex University Hospitals Trust
Shaw, Dr Matthew Consultant Spinal Surgeon, Royal National Orthopaedic Hospital; and Co-founder, Remedy UK
Soni, Ash Pharmacist, Lambeth, and Chair, Lambeth Professional Executive Committee
Steele, Dr Jimmy Head of School & Professor of Oral Health Services Research, Newcastle University
Stephenson, Terence President, Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health

T

Taylor, Jeremy Chief Executive, National Voices
Tooke, Sir John Vice Provost, University College London

V

Varnam, Dr Robert Practising GP Manchester

W

Walton, Gill Director of Midwifery, Portsmouth NHS Trust
Wells, Francis Cardiothoracic surgeon, Papworth Hospital

In News, NHS Future Forum | Tagged

66 Responses to NHS Future Forum members

  1. Dr Anthony Martin says:

    I would be interested in joining the forum. I am still an active consultant physician and have in the past been a Chairman of an NHS Trust for 8 years, and medical director (3 years), Co-founder of the NHS Confederation etc.etc.

  2. Jo Broadbent says:

    Given the level of impact on Public Health teams, and the possible increased fragmentation of Public Health as a result of the proposals, will more than one of the “small number of additional members” be representing the Public Health perspective?
    A Public Health Voice of Modernisation would also be a useful inclusion.

  3. Krishna Ramkhelawon says:

    Rather surprised that Public Health is not represented onto this Forum. Representation should be sought from both the Faculty of Public Health and the Royal Society for Public Health.

  4. Tom Gorman says:

    Echoing Jo Broadbent’s point, surely Public Health should be a key member of this consultative group. As experts in population medicine, their ability to identify and understanding the needs of communities are vital to inform reforms and to ensure that the health of the population is best fulfilled.

    It is Public Health that will know best the evidence (and the evidence gaps of course) towards improving the NHS/health, and they have the closest knowledge of commissioning of all medical specialities currently.

    Quite worrying that they have not on this list so far.

  5. Greg Dilliway says:

    An additional member representing Public Health would enhance the work of the Forum. Ensuring that the Public Health perspective is considered in terms of the health of the whole population and different groups in the long as well as short term is essential.

    The omission of such representation and voice in the Forum would be a mistake. Public Health has always made itself heard in advocating the value of a population approach. Although some may feel this as a ‘thorn in their side’, others will welcome the specialist advice that they bring as a welcome reminder and vision of the future (smoking bans, seatbelts….). Better to have advocates of the population as members of the Forum rather than loud voices outside.

    Greg Dilliway

  6. Julia Holding says:

    It would be helpful to have some front line nurses and allied health professionals around the table. I completely understand about the challenges of making the group representative versus managing diverse views, however as front line staff will have much of the responsibility for making the reforms work; I feel it is a mistake not to involve them directly.
    In view of the RCN vote today it might also be helpful to have some union representation.

    • jenny Greenfield says:

      I totally agree- where are practice nurse representation? It is the practice nurses who deliver expert patient care. primary care would not be able to exist without this major group of nurses. We do not seem to have a voice. I have requested to be on the GP consortium group within the PCT where I am based and have been told that there is no money for this position. The government are requesting nurse representation but nobody seems to be acknowledging this. Looking at the representation in the forum- there are not any nurses from Primary care- why not? Even at RCN congress back in April in Liverpool, there was not any primary care nurses selected to meet with the health minister. Why not?

  7. Deborah Milburn says:

    Where are representatives from speech and language, occupational therapy, psychology, arts therapies etc? Who decided that these people were the best placed to do this job? They are predominantly doctors and nurses. The general public still believe that these professions are the only ones providing the health care for the nation but surely you know better.

    • elizabeth field says:

      I too am concerned that Allied Health Professions are not properly and fully represented. To me it suggests a lack of undertanding both of the needs of service users and of the diversity of clinical skills necessary for delivery of effective healthcare.

  8. Peggy Frost says:

    I agree with Deborah Milburn – where are the allied health professionals – the occupational therapists, physiotherapists, speech and language therapists etc? They provide essential services to NHS patients and should have a voice on this important forum.

  9. Neil Robinson says:

    So, 40 named members, each of whom appears (with the exception of 1 – (Sally Brearley)) to be a highly paid public servant with a vested interest kin some part of the service.

    I would estimate that if the average meeting took place in working time for 1/2 day, and everyone attended, the cost (39 members at a reasonable average of £500 per half day to their sponsoiring organsisation) – the cost per meeting, with room hire in London (of course), travelling expenses, secretarial services etc. will be at least £30,000 per meeting – or a nurse per year.

    What would the general public really have. 39 professionals and a patient representative pontificating or a nurse?

    I hope this august body comes up with something to justify its cost.

    NR

    • Gavin Egan says:

      Is there really just one person representing patients!? No disrespect to Sally Brearley but this issue is far too important to be left to a single member of the public. What is the criteria for representing patients? I would happliy get involved. More tranparency is required or this will look more and more like the cynical PR exercise many alredy believe it to be.

  10. Quentin Sandifer says:

    The absence of public health representation illustrates a concern of many public health professionals that the Government thinks that its proposals for public health are a done deal. The fact is that many public health organisations and professionals, myself included, are simply not convinced about the Government’s plans. So if you are really listening Mr Lansley, and if you really are committed to population health improvement, appoint at least one front line public health professional. After all they will have to make your ideas work.

  11. The Royal Society for Public Health strongly encourages the appointment of a leading figure from the field of public health. This will help ensure that the Implementation Plan for ‘Healthy Lives, Healthy People’ reflects the practical realities of transition and the evidence of ‘what works’ in different circumstances. It is essential that public health is also viewed as an integral aspect of the ‘Liberating the NHS’ White Paper. Defining the contribution of the Third Sector and Higher Education should also be a central consideration during this ‘reflective’ period.

  12. Dr Richard Rawlins says:

    Where were all these folks a couple of years ago. That’s when the consultation/forum should have taken place.

    And since we do not know the criteria for their selection, we cannot value their contributions, assess any biases or conflicts of interests they may have , nor value the conclusions which may be reached.

    I urge they explain how GPs are to “make the patient your first concern” as required by the GMC’s Good Medical Practice, and also ration the resources for which they will be responsible in an equitable and explicable way. Particularly in respect of allowing patients access to specialist care in the secondary NHS sector. Or will patients who want such care have to turn to the private sector?

    • Mihaela Carmaciu says:

      I cannot agree more with these comments. Also, how can a patient really get excellent healthcare (mind you, as he/she expects it!) when the “excellence” is being decided by a group of commissioning leaders, whoever they might be?

      In my view, we either accept that we offer free of charge, middle quality, standard healthcare to everybody (and be honest about it in front of our people) or we allow the patient to do the commissioning for him/herself, which basically means allowing more and more privatisation in UK healthcare.

  13. Louise Hurst says:

    I’d like to add my support for the inclusion of representation from Public Health on this Forum. This is of concern on two counts:
    1. The Health Bill has huge implications for Public Health and concerns have been raised, is this not being considered in the ‘listening’ exercise?
    2. Public Health has played an important role in supporting the commissioning of healthcare in PCTs. How this will continue into the future has not been clarified. The involvement of an individual/individuals from Public Health on this forum would help to ensure that skills and expertise in this area will be fully utilised, both in the future and to inform the ‘listening exercise’

  14. Diane Steiner says:

    Agree with other comments that the membership of the forum is very imbalanced, especially where public health is concerned. Public health is concerned with the health of the whole population and has the skills to look at the impacts of health system changes as a whole. A shift in balance to include more public health professionals would add value to the process – as well as being able to provide specific input on public health changes proposed in the white papers and health and social care bill.

  15. John Beavers says:

    I can’t help but wonder how the NHS would change if all our efforts where focussed on Results and not Activities.

  16. Justin Wong says:

    Just to echo the multiple posts made above regarding the absence of representation of Public Health among forum members which is particularly concerning given that reform of public health services, including the establishment of Public Health England form a major part of the NHS reforms.

    Further, as has already been mentioned, public health brings a different perspective by advocating for the population, as opposed to just individuals or groups of patients.

  17. As the reforms are designed to improve the quality and responsiveness of services to patients needs, wishes and perspectives it would be helpful to know how the myriad of patient participation and user-led groups embedded in general practices and communities can have their voices heard in this exercise. The diversity and geographic spread of grass roots views needs to be captured which reflect the unique nature of localities. How will the Forum address this?

    • ecp says:

      Thanks for your comment Stephanie. We’ll publish more information and updates about the Forum and how it will work.

    • Susannah Elisabeth says:

      How very sad indeed that this exercise does not include the people that matter, ie patients, and only the establishment. The government came up with a plan that they purported would put patients in the driving seat of their care, only they forgot to ask us what our thoughts were before drafting their plans. Now, in this exercise, the same thing is happening. The idea that clinicians and big charities speak for grass-roots patients is a myth. These organisations have too many vested interests in current services to independently stand up for our views. The very types of organisation that cause so much patient suffering are the ones being given a say. Individual patients, and user and carer groups should be given a real say in this, particularly in areas like mental health where there is so little choice and voice. It is this lack of listening to mental health service users that has resulted in such poor services and the money-down-the-drain commissioning of totally ineffective services that ensure nobody ever gets better but millions of pounds gets wasted every year.
      These reforms will fail as they are clinician-based and not patient-based.

  18. A Roberts says:

    Is there information anywhere that shows which of these Forum members are also members of one of the medical trade unions?

  19. Prof Howard McNulty says:

    To fulfil its role properly requires the addition of public health professionals, pharmacists and PAMs.

    Otherwise it may not even properly understand the points made by the wider professional networks or patients or the legal implications of any public proposals in those areas.

  20. Graham Jukes says:

    Where is the environmental health voice in all this? “Health is not just the absence of disease but a complete state of physical, mental and social well being”. The holistic picture is missing particularly on the role that local authority environmental health services play in addressing poor housing, health promotion, social deprivation and the contribution to multi agency public health delivery. Give us a call if you want a reality check!

  21. Ms B says:

    And where are the voices of the non-clinical NHS staff on the ground who are engaging, involving, listening and working with patients, public and communities – these are not the Chief Executives and Senior Managers!! Please don’t lose this wealth of experience and local knowledge.

  22. Katie Cole says:

    This forum needs public health representation.

    The NHS currently benefits from public health support, chiefly in ensuring that evidence-based services are delivered and targeted at those in greatest need.

    Health service improvement is one of the three key domains of public health, but despite this, it has not been accounted for in the existing NHS reforms. It is therefore essential that public health professionals are represented on this panel.

  23. Alexis Macherianakis says:

    I would like to reiterate the need for public health professionals to be represented in this forum, as it provides very distinct perspectives in service redesign, commissioning, policy development and can work very effectively in the interface between primary and secondary care.

    It would also be interesting to be told the logic of these appointments, as they do not seem to represent any constituencies, professional groups, royal colleges, trade unions etc. Most of the Forum members appear to represent just themselves. I wonder what is the legitimacy of such an undertaking.

    Someone may wonder whether this is because almost every body that represents health professionals working in the NHS has expressed concern and opposition to the proposed reforms.

  24. Jenny says:

    Agree with many of the above comments – where are the ‘front – line’ nurses and allied health professionals? Also agree public health very under represented. The people that deliver the majority of care and will be implementing most of the changes need to have a voice – theye are closest to the patients

  25. Mike Beaman says:

    There needs to be representation from Pharmacists and Public Health – Pharmacists have more regular contact with patients and are the most accessible service in healthcare – Public Health is at the centre of the NHS reforms. Both these areas need to be represented on this Forum.

  26. John Battersby says:

    Given that this represents one of the most radical changes to the delivery of public health I totally agree with other colleagues about the need for adequate public health representation on this group. I note the inclusion of a LA adult services persepctive, which I welcome, but I’m also concerned about the apparent lack of a LA children’s persepctive – a Director of Children’s Services would also be a helpful addition.

  27. Hugh Wilkins says:

    The comments above demonstrate strong support for involvement of public health and allied health professionals. It seems to me that the forum would also benefit from representation of the healthcare science (HCS) workforce, which makes vital contributions to the NHS.

    There are some 50,000 HCSs working in the NHS in England, almost as many as the number of AHPs. They contribute to about 80% of diagnoses, and the treatment of many NHS patients. They enable and drive forward many of the advances and innovations within medicine.

    HCS staff, in my experience, have a better understanding of quality than most other NHS staff groups. They often have strong analytical and problem-solving skills. Their voice needs to be heard.

  28. Valerie John-Charles says:

    The forum is top heavy with CE’s and Director’s etc., I also would like to see more staff who are leaders and can interpret the real needs of patients and field level staff.

  29. Liz Powell says:

    Where are service users and carers – especially in mental health (1 in 4 people experience mental distress at some time) and older people’s services (3 out of 4 hospital in-patients)? If we’re really putting the patient at the centre of the NHS then they need to be at the centre of the forum too.

  30. Kevin Murphy MRPharmS says:

    It’s a bit ridiculous that allied health professionals, especially pharmacy, are not represented when they have so much to offer in terms of improving service provision and reducing cost in the NHS. Royal Pharmaceutical Society/NPA/Pharmacy Voice organisations should be considered as representatives of the pharmacy profession

  31. Paul Walsh says:

    Although Prof. Steele is on the forum there is no representation of General Dental Practitioners agaim. General Dental Practitioners make up 90% of the workforce. They deliver the vast majority of the NHS commissioned dental services but their opinion never leads service development in dentistry.

  32. AP says:

    I am astounded that pharmacists and/or their representative bodies are not deemed worthy enough to be included on this forum. I cannot say i am surprised in the least as it seems this forum will consist mainly of and be led by those that consider themselves the only ‘important and knowledgeable’ healthcare professionals within the NHS, namely GPs. Cronyism at its finest!

  33. Rosemary Kyle says:

    The White paper is entitled ‘Equity and Excellence …’ I am sure that the people appointed to the forum thus far are all excellent at what they do, but there does seem to be a bias towards representation by GPs and those with clinical roles. It is understandable that the public predominantly thinks of doctors and nurses when considering the NHS; at times of crisis treatment of an illness needs to be the primary concern. But deciding how to apportion scarce resources equitably across a whole population is a skill that public health practitioners would bring to the forum. Clinical intervention alone will not be able to cope with e.g. the increasing prevalence of obesity and type 2 diabetes. Clinical and public health practitioners should work together to plan a seamless service from prevention of new cases to treatment of those already existing. I therefore add to previous comments urging inclusion of public health representation in this forum.

  34. Health Economist says:

    I am gob smacked by the lack of representation from the North West (1 GP) – is this another attempt to create a North South Divide? And totally agree that Public Health and other professions should have representation

  35. Gill Dolbear says:

    Whilst it is great to see one AHP amongst this group, it would have been better to include several different AHPs so that there could be one in each of the sub-groups. AHPs provide a very wide range of services to patients and have a vast amount of experience in relation to integrated care. They are therefore in an ideal position to determine where patients are likely to suffer as a result of fragmented services and to offer solutions. The Forum should make greater use of their expertise.

  36. Sara Richards says:

    Once again Practice Nurses have been overlooked and are not represented. In the brave new world of Consortia practice nurses will be playing an even bigger role than they do now in implementing care for the patient at grass roots primary care level. Like Public Health (which must also be represented) we do preventive work which keeps acute care costs down. I offer myself to represent practice nurses.

  37. Michael Vidal says:

    I note that the only patient representative is a research fellow in Patient and Public Involvement could the NHS not have gone to NHS London PPAG for some less academic minded patients representatives who would be frank and open in thier views.

    • Vorobyey says:

      So not a real patient representative then – just one of the lads (and lasses).

  38. Kate@DH says:

    Thanks for all your comments on the membership of the NHS Future Forum.

    We have tried to make sure that the membership of the Forum is broadly representative of a very wide range of different voices from, and around, the NHS. However, we have been listening to your comments and we have sought to address important omissions where appropriate.

    See details of latest members.

    • Tina Fashola says:

      I receive E-mails but can not find my name as a member
      Can I join please if I have not already?
      Thank you

    • As a patient it saddens but doesn’t surprise me that the people who really count for us: nurses, OT, physios, carers’ representativers are not represented.
      Where are reps. from the Princess Royal’s carers charity>?
      Why only ONE genuine patient?

      We are the people who have to pay out for the NHS – I seem to remember there was a famous saying, “no taxation without representation”.

      Obviously the NHS hasn’t learn the lesson of the Boston Tea Party.

  39. elisabeth dodds says:

    if i have read the list correctly there is ONE patient representative. that is just not good enough however competent the person is.

  40. Former DH civil servant says:

    Interesting to see that three members are former DH civil servants – Bill McCarthy, Duncan Selbie, Anthony McKeever. Is this because they understand the realities of the policy process or because they can be trusted to smooth the way for the Government of the day?

  41. Adam Carrick says:

    why no health economists or health policy researchers? King’s Fund, York and Oxford centres for health economics spring to mind. Chris Ham, Alan Maynard, etc.
    Also, front-line commissioners working at the sharp end of making DH business model and policy decisions work. I’d be happy to discuss this further.

    • ecp says:

      Thanks for your comment Adam. The NHS Future Forum is comprised of more than 40 members, largely made up of frontline professionals, including practising GPs, NHS staff, patient representatives, as well as individuals from local government and across the voluntary sector. We have tried to make sure that the membership is broadly representative of a very wide range of different voices from, and around the NHS. Kate@DH

  42. Sarah Bealey says:

    I am delighted to see a wide range of senior officials in health and social care coming together to inform the Government’s listening exercise. My suggestion would be to round the membership to include partners of the NHS from the independent sector, crucial to ensure that choice and access targets are maintained and more representation from experts in Clinical Governance and Patient & Public Engagement e.g. from the Kings Fund,Dr Foster or NHS Clinical Governance leaders who have worked right across all sectors.

    Sarah Bealey
    Interim Executive

  43. Dr Keith Ritchie says:

    Mac McKeever worked for Bexley Care trust for the last 5 years.
    He was the most effective & radical manager I have ever experienced in almost 30 years as a GP.
    I am v pleased he has been appointed to this forum.

  44. Gill Gant says:

    I echo the thoughts of many of the above, particularly about the lack of AHP, Public Health representation on this forum and the tiny patient/carer representation. I am particularly interested in having clinical governance expertise within the forum. There is also much expertise sat within PCT’s where commissioners strive daily to translate government plans into workable solutions. Although ‘experts’ are the major players in this exercise, my other concern is that the ‘man/woman in the street’ is poorly represented here, and that seems to be a major omission.

  45. Sandra Husbands says:

    I agree with all the previous comments about the relative lack of representation from public health, allied health professions and patients and the public. I also think the group is rather top heavy, with a lot of very senior managers people. As a result, the group seems neither representative of the NHS, its patients nor the public in England at large. However, I’m most concerned that it is due to report in a month’s time and does not yet appear to have any terms of reference. If these have already been written/agreed, they have, so far, not been made public, which makes it very difficult for us to comment usefully on the membership or otherwise of this group.

  46. Nicola Low says:

    I am surprised that there appears to be no representation from Occupational Therapists on the Future Forum – the one profession that crosses the health social care boundary. OTs along with AHP colleagues are critical in enabling patients/service users to maximise independence and minimise disability arising from ill health/long term conditions. This in turn reduces the risk of hospital admission and makes for more successful discharges home. The general public view the health social divide as arbitary and any forum must include practioners who can deliver care pathways that reflect the ‘whole system’ rather than just the ‘medical’ components.

  47. Jan Middeton of London Cure the NHS says:

    Why are you not publishing comments that are objectively critical of this process? For example the one that I submitted a couple of days ago. Why pretend that it is an open and democratic process if it isn’t? How does this policy of censorship fit with the purported aim of this Forum to engage with the community and obtain feedback and opinions from the public?

  48. Kate in Ringwood, Hampshire says:

    Patient/Customer care is only as good as the staff who deliver it. The staff can only be as good as their working conditions. Rapid changes in legislation cause rapid changes in staff turnover. A combination of rapid changes and terrible working conditions is a recipe for disaster.

  49. Roz Davies says:

    There are some excellent minds and experts amongst the NHS Future Forum membership however given the policy agenda around Big Society, Civic Participation and Health Inequalities there is a gaping hole around both patient and community representation. We recognise that this is a really complex issue and very challenging to resolve but one patient rep seems a little out of balance. Additionally, most of the listening exercise response opportunities are online which excludes a significant proportion of the population.

    There are a number of networks which could be utilised to at least in part resolve this gap, e.g. the BIG Lottery have a set of nationwide Well-being Portfolios all with direct access to local communities and volunteers who have an interest in health and well-being. There are also patient specific networks and an emerging national community health champion network and a national thinktank type working group made up of a range of organisations with an interest in this area. Using some of these routes might lead to some really interesting ideas, debates and transformation changes for the health system.

  50. S Clarke says:

    Where are the front line staff around this table. Once again the people who do the hands on work are ignored. We struggle day after day to deliver quality care in a enviroment that changes at the whim of a minister who has no concept of working on a hospital ward. It is people like Lansley who need to go. There are no cleaners, porters, or support staff on your list. can you publish a list of where you are going to be. Or do you only listen to London hospitals.

  51. Jan Clarke says:

    I agree with many of the comments regarding patient representation and the relative dearth of public health on the forum-but there is a total lack of any sort of professional related to sexual health. Some of the most radical organsational changes are planned to affect delivery of services preventing and managing sexual infections, HIV, and unwanted pregnancy, yet there is no voice from any quarter dealing with sexual health or reproductive health matters

  52. john salter says:

    To truly represent the opinions of the entire NHS the forum would need to be an awful lot larger than 40 members but then of course achieving consensus in delivering their report would be impossible, it will be difficult enough with 40 members and will require a very strong chair.
    What is important is that the forum considers issues from perspectives and disciplines outside those represented round the table, hence the terms of reference and agenda items are far more important than the individuals that have been chosen to execute these.
    Further to this there is no guarantee that the final report will be given the credability it may (or may not) deserve, it is important that the final report be made available for public scrutiny in full – accountability works both ways – for those who form the report and those who are to act on its findings.

  53. Mike Harnor says:

    I was fortunate in being able to attend a listening event in London last week but the ministerial contact was very brief.
    In general the Future Forum member list contains far too little patient representation and there is no apparent attempt to source from those with a very specific interest in neurological services.
    Also under-represented, despite their particular specialist services access problems, are the remoter parts of England such as Cumbria, Northumberland, Devon and Cornwall.