Selly Oak abuse and naive MP
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: uk
Posts: 92
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Selly Oak abuse and naive MP
From ARRSE:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/liv...n_page_id=1770
If the incident occurred as reported, and Lynne Jones made the comments verbatim, then she should resign.
Absolutely gobsmacked.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/liv...n_page_id=1770
If the incident occurred as reported, and Lynne Jones made the comments verbatim, then she should resign.
Absolutely gobsmacked.
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: landan
Posts: 120
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To quote the mail:
"He couldn’t believe it. CSM Powell just had to stand and take abuse from these screaming and very aggressive women. I don’t think a guy would have got away with it.
"A lot of soldiers are worried that something more serious could happen. There isn’t much security here."
But the Labour MP for Selly Oak, Lynne Jones, refused to back calls for more secure facilities for troops.
She said: "The soldiers seem to want a little empire consisting of their own designated staff and facilities, a fiefdom.
"The point of basing the Centre for Defence Medicine at Selly Oak was to make the most of the range of experience here. The priority should always be the standard of clinical care.
"When I’ve visited the military ward it has been cluttered with staff."
... but isn't that the least that they deserve? This woman is an absolute disgrace.
"He couldn’t believe it. CSM Powell just had to stand and take abuse from these screaming and very aggressive women. I don’t think a guy would have got away with it.
"A lot of soldiers are worried that something more serious could happen. There isn’t much security here."
But the Labour MP for Selly Oak, Lynne Jones, refused to back calls for more secure facilities for troops.
She said: "The soldiers seem to want a little empire consisting of their own designated staff and facilities, a fiefdom.
"The point of basing the Centre for Defence Medicine at Selly Oak was to make the most of the range of experience here. The priority should always be the standard of clinical care.
"When I’ve visited the military ward it has been cluttered with staff."
... but isn't that the least that they deserve? This woman is an absolute disgrace.
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Falmouth
Posts: 1,651
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I get the impression she is anti-military
http://www.theyworkforyou.com/mp/lyn...m%2C_selly_oak
She would do well to remember that the sole reason she can stand up and make public comments such as those is because people like us are prepared to lay down our lives for her right to defend democracy.
Help us out here Mark Nichol.
http://www.theyworkforyou.com/mp/lyn...m%2C_selly_oak
She would do well to remember that the sole reason she can stand up and make public comments such as those is because people like us are prepared to lay down our lives for her right to defend democracy.
Help us out here Mark Nichol.
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Germany
Posts: 68
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Jones Woman
Its absolutely disgusting that an MP should express such anti - military / pro - (insert here own description of the assailants) opinions.
I shall be sending a suitable message to;
[email protected]
Hopefully I will not be alone.
rigex
I shall be sending a suitable message to;
[email protected]
Hopefully I will not be alone.
rigex
Last edited by Rigex; 12th Jun 2007 at 06:35. Reason: missing word added!
I thought the whole point of free speech was that everyone could express their opinion, no matter how repulsive others might find it. I am sure the CSM will not be permanently damaged by this incident! As to the MP, what do you expect? She is only interested in the next election so has to cater for her constituents.
What I actually find horrifying is that our troops may well need protecting from the public who are becoming increasingly angry about the two armed conflicts currently being fought on dubious grounds.
What I actually find horrifying is that our troops may well need protecting from the public who are becoming increasingly angry about the two armed conflicts currently being fought on dubious grounds.
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Bedfordshire
Age: 55
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Reply to an email sent by an E-Goat member.
Anyone else had a response from Lynne Jones i receivend this lengthy reply:
Quote:
I have received a large number of emails from members of the public as a
result of the inaccurate way my comments were reported in the 10 June
edition of the Mail on Sunday. There is a parliamentary convention that
I should only respond in detail to correspondence from my own
constituents. However I hope that the following statement clarifies my
position and I am glad to have this opportunity of setting the record
straight. If you are constituent, I am happy to correspond with you on
any further points you wish to raise if you would please provide me with
your full postal address and indicate you are a constituent in the
header.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------
The remarks attributed to me in the 10 June edition of the Mail on
Sunday were an inaccurate reflection of the lengthy conversation I had
with the reporter on Thursday night. This included the example of a
soldier who had had his hand successfully reconstructed after having
three ribs removed for the purpose. He would have lost his hand were it
not for the skill and dedication of the clinical staff involved - the
very staff whose morale is being constantly undermined by the barrage of
unjustified criticism coming from the media who regurgitate and
exaggerate old stories. I am informed that some staff have got so fed
up with this situation that they are looking for new jobs and such is
their skill that they will be snapped up by other hospitals. What good
will that do our troops? You will note that the particular incident
which apparently justified the headline "Muslim Women Abuse Soldier at
Troops Hospital" took place a month ago and was described by the soldier
involved as being a minor incident. Though I would condemn any
inappropriate intervention, I am told the use of the word "abuse" does
not reflect what happened. There has been another allegation that a
soldier was abused by a Muslim nurse, yet there has never been a Muslim
nurse on any of the wards where soldiers have been treated.
I informed the reporter from the MoS about this type of inaccurate
reports and I also told him of my recent meeting with one of the injured
men whose case has been given a high media profile (unfavourable to the
hospital). At the point I met the soldier, he was returning to the ward
after a weekend away, including a visit to a football match. He remains
in the ward despite the hospital's view that he is ready to be
discharged to military-run rehabilitation. At the different stages in
his treatment, he has been in three separate wards appropriate to his
condition at the time. Surveys of military personnel who have received
treatment at Selly Oak have been overwhelmingly favourable - none of
this is reported because it does not fit the picture that has been
painted by those seeking to undermine the work being done at Selly Oak.
They care more for a good story than the damage they are doing. They
are not concerned about any effect on morale caused by giving our armed
forces such a negative impression of the quality of care they might
expect to receive should they be injured!
The decision by the MoD to base hospital care of military staff in the
NHS was taken, not to cut costs, as stated in the article, but for
clinical reasons. Health care has become more specialised and the range
of specialties and depth of experience required to provide the full
range of care required by the military (such as that described above)
can only be provided by a large acute teaching trust.
Also the training and education of the clinical military staff needs to
be undertaken in an environment where the full range of injuries and
illnesses are seen and treated. This is to better equip the military
clinicians to deal with any eventuality when deployed at times of
conflict. The Royal Centre for Defence Medicine at Selly Oak provides
both these functions
It seems that recent events have sought to overturn these principles and
that considerations other than clinical need are being brought into play
to determine where injured military personnel are cared for and where
military clinical staff are placed to gain experience. These issues
should be best left to those with the knowledge and skills to make those
judgements based on the clinical needs of the patients i.e. the doctors
and nurses looking after the patients. Similarly the placement of the
military staff should be the responsibility of those who have
responsibility for the training and education of the military clinical
staff. Anything else must surely compromise patient safety, both for
those patients in Selly Oak and for those injured in the frontline
before they can be returned to UK. Yet, it is clear from my
conversations with senior members from the Armed Forces medical staff
that their views are being overridden as a response to the media
coverage, which has been stimulated by some factions in the MoD who
opposed the closure of the military hospitals. It is in that context
that I used the word "fiefdom". At no point did I say that the soldiers
wanted a fiefdom.
The reference to "clutter" also gives the wrong impression. When I
visited the ward where 12 of the 20 military patients in the hospital
were being treated (and remember their numbers can vary substantially
such that any "dedicated ward" could one day be half empty and then next
full to overflowing) I was struck by how many staff, in particular
military staff in full uniform, were on the ward. I have been told that
this is usually in double figures and on one recent occasion it was
possible to count 19 non-clinical uniformed military staff on the ward!
There is no doubt that the ward is old and cramped as is all the
accommodation in this hospital but a new hospital is currently being
constructed and by 2010 all patients will have first class facilities.
Meanwhile I do not consider it conducive to recovery, or to security, to
have so many people milling around.
In conclusion, the coverage in the MoS was deliberately slanted to give
the impression that I was not concerned about wounded soldiers coming
back from Iraq and Afghanistan when, in fact, the opposite is the case
and I was trying to put a true reflection of the excellent work that has
been going on at Selly Oak. I should also point out that the hospital
also provides elective treatment for military staff that are not being
deployed overseas. However, given the reputation of this particular
paper, I suppose I should not be surprised at the manner in which my
views have been misrepresented. I will of course be writing to them in
an attempt to put the record straight
LYNNE JONES MP
Usual Politician speak, the MoS got it wrong, I was misquoted, Blah, Blah,Blah.
Oh well, chuffing politicians!
Anyone else had a response from Lynne Jones i receivend this lengthy reply:
Quote:
I have received a large number of emails from members of the public as a
result of the inaccurate way my comments were reported in the 10 June
edition of the Mail on Sunday. There is a parliamentary convention that
I should only respond in detail to correspondence from my own
constituents. However I hope that the following statement clarifies my
position and I am glad to have this opportunity of setting the record
straight. If you are constituent, I am happy to correspond with you on
any further points you wish to raise if you would please provide me with
your full postal address and indicate you are a constituent in the
header.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------
The remarks attributed to me in the 10 June edition of the Mail on
Sunday were an inaccurate reflection of the lengthy conversation I had
with the reporter on Thursday night. This included the example of a
soldier who had had his hand successfully reconstructed after having
three ribs removed for the purpose. He would have lost his hand were it
not for the skill and dedication of the clinical staff involved - the
very staff whose morale is being constantly undermined by the barrage of
unjustified criticism coming from the media who regurgitate and
exaggerate old stories. I am informed that some staff have got so fed
up with this situation that they are looking for new jobs and such is
their skill that they will be snapped up by other hospitals. What good
will that do our troops? You will note that the particular incident
which apparently justified the headline "Muslim Women Abuse Soldier at
Troops Hospital" took place a month ago and was described by the soldier
involved as being a minor incident. Though I would condemn any
inappropriate intervention, I am told the use of the word "abuse" does
not reflect what happened. There has been another allegation that a
soldier was abused by a Muslim nurse, yet there has never been a Muslim
nurse on any of the wards where soldiers have been treated.
I informed the reporter from the MoS about this type of inaccurate
reports and I also told him of my recent meeting with one of the injured
men whose case has been given a high media profile (unfavourable to the
hospital). At the point I met the soldier, he was returning to the ward
after a weekend away, including a visit to a football match. He remains
in the ward despite the hospital's view that he is ready to be
discharged to military-run rehabilitation. At the different stages in
his treatment, he has been in three separate wards appropriate to his
condition at the time. Surveys of military personnel who have received
treatment at Selly Oak have been overwhelmingly favourable - none of
this is reported because it does not fit the picture that has been
painted by those seeking to undermine the work being done at Selly Oak.
They care more for a good story than the damage they are doing. They
are not concerned about any effect on morale caused by giving our armed
forces such a negative impression of the quality of care they might
expect to receive should they be injured!
The decision by the MoD to base hospital care of military staff in the
NHS was taken, not to cut costs, as stated in the article, but for
clinical reasons. Health care has become more specialised and the range
of specialties and depth of experience required to provide the full
range of care required by the military (such as that described above)
can only be provided by a large acute teaching trust.
Also the training and education of the clinical military staff needs to
be undertaken in an environment where the full range of injuries and
illnesses are seen and treated. This is to better equip the military
clinicians to deal with any eventuality when deployed at times of
conflict. The Royal Centre for Defence Medicine at Selly Oak provides
both these functions
It seems that recent events have sought to overturn these principles and
that considerations other than clinical need are being brought into play
to determine where injured military personnel are cared for and where
military clinical staff are placed to gain experience. These issues
should be best left to those with the knowledge and skills to make those
judgements based on the clinical needs of the patients i.e. the doctors
and nurses looking after the patients. Similarly the placement of the
military staff should be the responsibility of those who have
responsibility for the training and education of the military clinical
staff. Anything else must surely compromise patient safety, both for
those patients in Selly Oak and for those injured in the frontline
before they can be returned to UK. Yet, it is clear from my
conversations with senior members from the Armed Forces medical staff
that their views are being overridden as a response to the media
coverage, which has been stimulated by some factions in the MoD who
opposed the closure of the military hospitals. It is in that context
that I used the word "fiefdom". At no point did I say that the soldiers
wanted a fiefdom.
The reference to "clutter" also gives the wrong impression. When I
visited the ward where 12 of the 20 military patients in the hospital
were being treated (and remember their numbers can vary substantially
such that any "dedicated ward" could one day be half empty and then next
full to overflowing) I was struck by how many staff, in particular
military staff in full uniform, were on the ward. I have been told that
this is usually in double figures and on one recent occasion it was
possible to count 19 non-clinical uniformed military staff on the ward!
There is no doubt that the ward is old and cramped as is all the
accommodation in this hospital but a new hospital is currently being
constructed and by 2010 all patients will have first class facilities.
Meanwhile I do not consider it conducive to recovery, or to security, to
have so many people milling around.
In conclusion, the coverage in the MoS was deliberately slanted to give
the impression that I was not concerned about wounded soldiers coming
back from Iraq and Afghanistan when, in fact, the opposite is the case
and I was trying to put a true reflection of the excellent work that has
been going on at Selly Oak. I should also point out that the hospital
also provides elective treatment for military staff that are not being
deployed overseas. However, given the reputation of this particular
paper, I suppose I should not be surprised at the manner in which my
views have been misrepresented. I will of course be writing to them in
an attempt to put the record straight
LYNNE JONES MP
Usual Politician speak, the MoS got it wrong, I was misquoted, Blah, Blah,Blah.
Oh well, chuffing politicians!
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Temporarily missing from the Joe Louis Arena
Posts: 2,131
Received 27 Likes
on
16 Posts
She is only interested in the next election so has to cater for her constituents.
What I actually find horrifying is that our troops may well need protecting from the public who are becoming increasingly angry about the two armed conflicts currently being fought on dubious grounds.
I've no doubt that protestors would rather take their grudges to Westminster than Selly Oak hospital (with the exception of a few idiots) but peaceful protest is a difficult thing to do in this increasingly undemocratic country.
On the contrary, she thinks the core of the issue is that this article was a criticism of nursing standards in the hospital. She glosses over the thrust of the case which was the security implications of having military personnel, in a vulnerable state, easily accessed by peolple with a grudge. I note that she did not condem the actions of the Muslim women who accosted the SM, mearly quibled that it was not "abuse".
A pathetic, jaundiced response from a mealy mouthed politician who does not deserve the protection afforded by those who give their lives and limbs so that she can appease the militant minority (?) in her constituancy.
A pathetic, jaundiced response from a mealy mouthed politician who does not deserve the protection afforded by those who give their lives and limbs so that she can appease the militant minority (?) in her constituancy.
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: London
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Selly Oak/ MPs' comments.
I am the author of the piece in The Mail on Sunday about CSM Powell at Selly Oak. Ms Jones, be very careful about calling into question the accuracy of how you were quoted in this article. You and I know very well you spoke very evocatively, using words such as "fiefdom" and soldiers wanting their "little empire". You were not misquoted, nor represented.
Best wishes,
Mark Nicol
Best wishes,
Mark Nicol
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Wiltshire
Age: 59
Posts: 903
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You and I know very well you spoke very evocatively, using words such as "fiefdom" and soldiers wanting their "little empire". You were not misquoted, nor represented.
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Up North
Posts: 801
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Army are hopping mad, rightly so!
http://www.arrse.co.uk/cpgn2/Forums/...start=180.html
Mr Nicol, well done! I look forward to a rebuttal of the weasel-like Jones's non-denial denial. A public furore over the Armed Forces may just make it that little more difficult for Jones to cash in with quangoships etc after standing down.
http://www.arrse.co.uk/cpgn2/Forums/...start=180.html
Mr Nicol, well done! I look forward to a rebuttal of the weasel-like Jones's non-denial denial. A public furore over the Armed Forces may just make it that little more difficult for Jones to cash in with quangoships etc after standing down.
Join Date: May 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Selly Oak/ MPs' comments
It's really good that the journalist has joined the thread. Maybe the MP could pitch in, too. In which case we could ask her:
1. She said "at the point I met the soldier, he was returning to the ward
after a weekend away.... He remains in the ward despite the hospital's view that he is ready to be discharged to military-run rehabilitation." Did the clinicians have the soldier's permission to discuss his medical details with the MP (I doubt it) or did she report them to their professional bodies for breach of confidentiality (I doubt it) or has she made this up (too, the journalist would say)?
2. She voted against the Commons motion to invade Iraq. Will she follow Clare Short and resign the Labour whip?
1. She said "at the point I met the soldier, he was returning to the ward
after a weekend away.... He remains in the ward despite the hospital's view that he is ready to be discharged to military-run rehabilitation." Did the clinicians have the soldier's permission to discuss his medical details with the MP (I doubt it) or did she report them to their professional bodies for breach of confidentiality (I doubt it) or has she made this up (too, the journalist would say)?
2. She voted against the Commons motion to invade Iraq. Will she follow Clare Short and resign the Labour whip?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: uk
Posts: 92
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mr Nicol, thanks for posting an enlightening snippet on this thread. Can we take it that a follow up piece is due?
Having read her response my blood boils. Every single Labour politician refuses to enter into reasoned debate and answer direct questions where the health service is concerned. Every time we have the same old tired response of "if you are questioning any aspect of health then you are denigrating the fine work of our hard working nurses and doctors" utter utter debate stifling bollox.
Having read the piece in the MoS the issue is SECURITY and more importantly the piece of mind of the stalwarts undergoing treatment which is based on SECURITY. The standard of care, although questioned in the past, was not an issue raised in this piece and hence was irrelevant in her response. Protection of our lads and lasses from militants should be vigorously enforced to the full extent of the law using all means possible.
If the only way to ensure some sort of protection is indeed a fiefdom then so be it - it is the least these people deserve. They deserve our thanks; they deserve proper and timely medical care; they deserve protection from abuse and they deserve the respect of an MP whose Government sent them in harms way.
Ms Jones you are a disgrace and you should resign.
Having read her response my blood boils. Every single Labour politician refuses to enter into reasoned debate and answer direct questions where the health service is concerned. Every time we have the same old tired response of "if you are questioning any aspect of health then you are denigrating the fine work of our hard working nurses and doctors" utter utter debate stifling bollox.
Having read the piece in the MoS the issue is SECURITY and more importantly the piece of mind of the stalwarts undergoing treatment which is based on SECURITY. The standard of care, although questioned in the past, was not an issue raised in this piece and hence was irrelevant in her response. Protection of our lads and lasses from militants should be vigorously enforced to the full extent of the law using all means possible.
If the only way to ensure some sort of protection is indeed a fiefdom then so be it - it is the least these people deserve. They deserve our thanks; they deserve proper and timely medical care; they deserve protection from abuse and they deserve the respect of an MP whose Government sent them in harms way.
Ms Jones you are a disgrace and you should resign.
A dirty weekend in Hospital
Selly Oak in the news again last night, in the documentary, a dirty weekend in Hospital. This programme concentrated on those hospitals with high MRSA cases and Selly Oak was amongst them. Interestingly, so was Queen Alexandra in Portsmouth another hospital with a MDHU!
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 887
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From Wyler:
'I thought the whole point of free speech was that everyone could express their opinion, no matter how repulsive others might find it.'
True, Wyler, except for 2 things:
1. The CSM, as is the case with most other military personnel, was not able to express his opinion.
2. Express??? Mark used the words 'surrounded...heckled...ranted'. Express? Nothing so reasoned in this case.
'I thought the whole point of free speech was that everyone could express their opinion, no matter how repulsive others might find it.'
True, Wyler, except for 2 things:
1. The CSM, as is the case with most other military personnel, was not able to express his opinion.
2. Express??? Mark used the words 'surrounded...heckled...ranted'. Express? Nothing so reasoned in this case.
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Bridgwater Somerset
Posts: 459
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When I worked as a Staff Nurse in our local General Hospital back in the 80s there was a ward solely for the use of hospital staff who needed treatment. Having met staff from Haslar Royal Naval Hospital I was very impressed by their treatment of patients and their understanding and treatment of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder. I know during and after the Falklands War many were successfully treated there.
This government owes a duty of care to its armed forces and yes they should be treated differently from Joe Public, in Hospitals staffed by Dr's and Nurses who can understand the traumas they have been through .
This government owes a duty of care to its armed forces and yes they should be treated differently from Joe Public, in Hospitals staffed by Dr's and Nurses who can understand the traumas they have been through .
