News

More pressure on DH over risk register

Medical royal college and union leaders have said it is “astonishing” that the Government will not share with the public the risk register created to identify the potential consequences of the reforms.

The Information Commissioner ruled in November that the document should be released, but the Department of Health has refused, and its appeal against the decision is due to be heard in two weeks’ time.

In an open letter, the heads of the Royal College of GPs, the BMA, RCN, RCM, Faculty of Public Health, Allied Health Professions Federation, Chartered Society of Physiotherapists, Institute of Healthcare Management, and the British Association for Community Child Health, say: “This is the largest and most complex piece of legislation since the foundation of the NHS and it is incumbent on the government to share with the public the calculated risks.”

The Labour Party and some Liberal Democrats, as well as two Conservative MPs, are also calling for the register to be published in the name of transparency and good decision-making.

The Government has so far refused, pointing out that such risk registers produced by departments are not routinely published.

Ministers say publishing the document could have “very significant implications” for both the DH and other departments.

Health commentator Mike Birtwistle of political consultants MHP explained some of that thinking on his blog, saying: “Risk registers are – by definition – meant to explore every possible issue that could go wrong and therefore never make happy reading. I dare say the Department of Health risk registers do examine what could potentially go wrong as a result of reform, but they will also assess other threats, such as those posed by terrorism and outbreaks of infectious disease. There are clearly good reasons why these should not be exposed to public scrutiny. And there is also the issue of cross-government precedents: if the Department of Health publishes its risk register, then why not the Treasury, which could cause serious havoc on the financial markets? This explains why previous administrations also refused to publish such documents.”

In the light of the political situation and in the interests of transparency, however, he suggests that health secretary Andrew Lansley briefs his opposite number for Labour, Andy Burnham, and health select committee chair Stephen Dorrell, on privy council terms, meaning what they learn cannot be shared with the public.

Tell us what you think – have your say below, or email us directly at [email protected]