Ega Closure Delayed Again

Scan page 11

deferred for another. two months.

At a meeting with statt at the hospital last Tuesday, the Chairman of Camden and Islington Area Health Aurhority admitted that the proposed replacement facilities at the Whittington hospital were inadequate for treating patients and that it would require at least eight weeks further work on the replacement wards to bring them up to standard.

Previously, the AHA had stated then enterting ios los the Ba ot month of occupation, on February 15th and of removing essential equipment on January 28th.

In answer to this threat, the EGA shop stewards committee had called for a mass picket of the hospital on both dates and in spite of the postponement of the closure date, 150 pickets manned the entrances to the hospital on Friday in case the AHA broke its promise of not moving equipment at this Stage.

And workers at the nearby University College Hospital threatened to walk out if any attempt was made to remove equipment from the EGA.

The main danger now lies in the confusion which the AHA is attempting to sow amonst the medical and nursing staff at the hospital and which has already been swallowed by some of the Trade Union officials involved in the dispute.

By admitting some "mistakes" in the way in which theywwere dealing with the EGA closure and inviting members of the EGA staff to become involved in planning the details of the move to Whittington, the AHA have duped some people into forgetting the principle of keeping the EGA open on its present site.

This has been most clearly expressed by NALGO secretary, Vince Burns, who told the management that the unions were no COME ON MR HIGGINS, 20•00 Ph PLAY THE GAME- •TREATMENT ESTIMATES... 5:00 YOU'VE HAD YOUR TEN MINUTES!

Needless to say, Burns' view of the union's position had not been discussed with any of the staff beforehand.

This again emphasises the need for regular meetings of union members at the EGA to control the way their officials are running the occupation.

McKINSEY, THE TOP US management consultants, planned the reorganisation of the NHS in 1974. For this they received a fee, believed to be fat.

They have just produced a further report on the NAS. They recommend that patients should pay fees to see doctors and have hospital treatment, and that the management structure of the NAS should be 'slimmed down' since it is "inefficient' For this report they are also to get a fee which (due to inflation) is believed to be even fatter.

IMF BMA

----- pull-quotes -----

BLUE -PRINT PRIVAT-