Change font size
It is currently Sat Apr 19, 2014 9:26 pm

Post a new topicPost a reply Page 1 of 1   [ 6 posts ]
Author Message
 Post subject: Muddying the waters
PostPosted: Sat Mar 31, 2012 9:38 am 
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 03, 2005 11:11 am
Posts: 24869
Location: Bradford
I am beginning to suspect that the "elephant in the room" syndrome which is so apparent in our media arises as much from ignorance and incompetence as it does any conspiracy to conceal the impact of the EU on our lives.

The EU elephant having been ignored on postal charges and the famous pasties, we now have "Exhibit 1" - this piece in the Daily Wail (illustrated above), which retails alarming tales about blunders and near-catastrophes occurring in British hospitals through poor language skills amongst the staff.

Despite its own piece in January (below) telling us that the EU is not directly responsible for such situations whereby nurses end up on the wards with a dangerously limited grasp of English, the paper continues to focus almost exclusively on the EU involvement.

View full article here

We are a satellite state of the Greater European Empire, ruled by a supreme government in Brussels. We owe this government neither loyalty nor obedience. It is not our government. It is theirs. It is our enemy.

 Profile E-mail  
 Post subject: Re: Muddying the waters
PostPosted: Sat Mar 31, 2012 10:17 am 

Joined: Sun Jul 03, 2005 11:11 am
Posts: 6700
When "everybody" is in charge, no one is in charge. Responsibility shared is responsibility diluted, and while the finger of blame is pointed in one direction, others equally culpable get away with it.

It is for precisely this reason that the Sovereign was awarded all Authority by those wise men in 1688.

If you don't get grumpy as you grow older then you aren't paying attention

 Post subject: Re: Muddying the waters
PostPosted: Sat Mar 31, 2012 10:29 am 

Joined: Wed Jul 23, 2008 12:59 pm
Posts: 1862
In fact, what the EU did was prevent the European-qualified medical staff being entered on the UK register, merely because they could not speak English. This did not in any way prevent hospitals insisting that staff displayed a specific level of skill – it simply transferred the responsibility from the national registration authorities to the individual employers.

The EU has muscled the national authority out of the way. Through incompetence or bloody mindedness this has been translated into the legally responsible party (hospitals) being told by someone other than the EU or coming to understand that it is not allowed to require decent language skill from its employees.

When the EU clarified things that should have been the end of it but at that time the British medical authorities were campaigning for centralising the language requirement into their hands which IIRC the EU directive doesn't allow for except in individual cases when concerns have been raised.

It isn't complicated: The hospitals are responsible for ensuring the people they employ are suitable for the job and that includes checking language skills. The discrimination against people with poor English is a sensible one given the patients generally speak English and the labels and terms used are in English. It's not about race, it's not about nationality, it's about the safety of patients so it is allowed.

The most recent Mail article says:
Yet, far from tackling this dangerous situation, the European Union is set to reinforce rules which ban English tests for doctors and nurses from the EU before they are allowed to work here, branding it a ‘restraint of free movement’ of workers.

The European directive, currently being debated in Brussels, insists that British employers can only test medics from Europe after their poor English has endangered patient care, flagging ‘serious and concrete doubt about the professional’s sufficient language knowledge’.

I think they are referring to this Directive 2005/36/EC – policy developments.

Article 53 of Directive 2005/36/EC says
"Persons benefiting from the recognition of professional qualifi-
cations shall have a knowledge of languages necessary for prac-
tising the profession in the host Member State."

If the person does not meet that standard they are not protected by the Directive. The problem appears to be that no language standard is being demanded by the direct employers of these professionals. At the same time the national authority is agitating to get that responsibility placed in their hands - ie that the BMA or whoever would test language skills - and this is what I think is not allowed. The EC directives talk about member states and national authorities. The responsibility of the actual employers seems to go unmentioned.(Perhaps because it is bloody obvious?)

Even the Press release Commission Representation United Kingdom about the reform serves to muddle things.
No major changes to the legislation itself were required or were requested by the UK, as national authorities are fully able under existing EU law to ensure that language skills are tested before any practitioner takes up employment or is given permission to practice on a self-employed basis.

I take this to mean the national authority can require language skills are tested before employment, or certainly recommend it, not that the national authority does the checking themselves.(Which is one of the reforms they want.)

It further says
In practical terms, this means that the National Health Service can continue to perform controls itself, according to its judgment of the need to perform checks on the language skills of individual medical practitioners or categories of practitioners. Alternatively, it can request the government to undertake this task or to delegate it to a regulator.

If they aren't checking language skills it is because they don't want to.

 Profile E-mail  
 Post subject: Re: Muddying the waters
PostPosted: Sat Mar 31, 2012 10:51 am 
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 16, 2011 8:50 pm
Posts: 175
I don't know why anyone should be surprised at all this, it's just standard bureaucratic incompetence.

 Profile E-mail  
 Post subject: Re: Muddying the waters
PostPosted: Sat Mar 31, 2012 3:37 pm 

Joined: Sat Oct 23, 2010 3:12 pm
Posts: 1441
How do these bods actually attain these posts?

Surely the application, whatever form it is - in is English......ah yes online applications, google translate.......But surely they are then interviewed - if someone cannot converse in decent English, surely it would be noticed...................Ah Yes of course - then the tick box culture takes over and equality and ethnic quotas are to be obeyed at all costs - patients be damned!!!

The madness of Political correctness and equality bonkers legislation trumps common sense and patient safety [ha ha ha] - I should have known.

Ultimately: because British politicians/executive are crap, don't know, don't care, are effin useless, run away from any responsibility/and the departmental panjandrums.

Who is running the country? The NHS bureaucracy? Why aren't more patients dying - is it luck or are the NHS statistics wrong or are they just lying about death rate stats - ie, done in by a foreign doctor's ineptitude = natural causes [I wouldn't put that one past 'em].

 Profile E-mail  
 Post subject: Re: Muddying the waters
PostPosted: Sat Mar 31, 2012 4:14 pm 

Joined: Sun Aug 29, 2010 2:03 pm
Posts: 437
Years ago, I hurt my eye. My Scottish GP sent me to a local hospital for diagnosis.
Firstly, some young Scottish nurse gave me a telling off. I was far too old (58), she said, to be wasting public time and money on my eyes; I should learn that I didn't need to see once I had nothing to contribute to society.
By the time I'd bent her ear for a minute or two, she looked less confident that she was better-educated than me; however, she may have retained her prejudice against my English voice.

And so to the doctor.

He had some unpronounceable euro-name; he looked through this cranky old machine. Then he lifted his face and laughed, physically in my face. "It's come completely away!"
The vitreous humour, that was. From the retina.
"I'm glad you think it's funny," I said. "Perhaps that's how you treat patients where you come from; here in Britain we've always thought that people need their eyes."
Well they didn't treat it - I was too old to matter. Inconsequentially, I was fortunate the retina was not torn. In any case, I wouldn't have let that lot touch my eye.

I told my GP that the standards of traditional British Medical professions seemed to be in abeyance.

My point: Conscience and thought determine action -and they precede speech. Thus if medical staff are driven by extraneous concerns or ignorance, and if they have no respect either for the profession or the patients---IT DOESN'T MATTER WHAT LANGUAGE THEY SPEAK.

PS: They're also the ones who encourage hordes of ethnic aliens to use besoms: to stir up clouds of infected dust around bedbound patients. IT DOESN'T MATTER WHAT LANGUAGE THEY SPEAK.

Prevention of communication** is the name of the game. Euros and their 'philes work to deny the British any voice, at any level. So why would we (or anyone) need ENGLISH.........??????

(**In Pedagogy of the Oppressed Freire describes prevention of communication as a weapon in the armory of successful Cultural Invaders. He knew---he suffered Communist oppression.)

 Profile E-mail  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post a new topicPost a reply Page 1 of 1   [ 6 posts ]

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  

Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
610nm Style by Daniel St. Jules of