Category Archives: Internal governance

Author Tony Beddow 1.11.18

Purpose

This short report gives progress made with our policy development process since the last Central Council meeting.

Members may recall that central Council previously agreed that four possible areas of work could form the focus of policy development in the coming months.

These are:

  1. Mental Health – building upon the (inchoate) policy produced by the Labour’s National Policy Forum
  2. Public Health policy – building upon current SHA policy, identifying gaps and undertaking work to fill them
  3. A National Care Service – exploring the boundaries of this emerging concept, its funding and governance and other aspects deemed relevant.
  4. The needs of carers – exploring the different needs of young and old carers, carers in rural and urban areas, carers with their own care needs, and other characteristics that require a policy response.

Progress to date

Member working groups have been established for b) and c) with co-conveners being Mike Roberts and Dr Tony Jewell for b) and Dr Brian Fisher and Tony Beddow for c).

Members of a) have been identified and two possible co-convenors are, at the time of writing, discussing how they might take this forward.

In all cases, membership has been drawn from different pars of the UK and from different experiences – with a workable group total of 7- 8 members.

The needs of carers did not engender much interest and this group remains to be formed.

Next steps

Co – conveners have been asked to provide a “scoping report” to the next Central Council setting out their proposals for the topics, questions or enquiries that they seek to explore or address, the timescales for doing this, and the target date for bringing a draft policy document to Central Council for debate and either adoption after amendment, or for further revision and work.

Central Council is requested to note this report.

4 Comments

April 2014

Call for Action—for a democratically accountable, membership led SHA

The Socialist Health Association’s January Central Council (CC) and March AGM have highlighted serious issues of governance and accountability within the SHA, problems which remain to be addressed. The AGM did not adopt either the Treasurer’s or the Auditor’s report and merely noted the Director’s and Chair’s reports.

The SHA is a democratically accountable membership organisation.

In the light of concerns about previous elections January CC agreed that the 2014 election would be tightly managed including a more formal and more clearly labelled call for nominations to go out. This did not happen.

In response to concerns raised that the CC included individuals with potential conflicts of interest through NHS-related consultancy and business work, the governance group requested that all candidates for election to be formally required to declare all relevant interests. This did not happen.

Requests were made by the governance group to confirm the list of eligible members and make these list accessible to all Branches. This did not happen.

In accordance with the Constitution, any CC members who had consistently failed to attend meetings were to be reminded of their duties and rendered ineligible for election. This did not happen.

Emails have been seen which appear to indicate that the Director disseminated selective information to individuals or branches, which would have influenced the outcome of the election. We seek credible reassurances that this did not happen

During the past year at a time when health policy and the NHS was at the top of the political agenda the SHA national body has not been visible on any of the major issues affecting the NHS in England.

No clear position on how the H & SC Act should be repealed. Likewise no clear view on Lord Owen’s Bill to re-establishing the Secretary for Health’s requirement to provide a full and comprehensive health service is forthcoming. No clear position has been taken on the care data issue, nor on Section 75, nor on Clause 119, nor on PFIs, nor on the dangers of the EU/US treaty, i.e. the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP), on the health service.

The SHA is a democratically accountable Labour Party Affiliate.

Do members of CC and Officers accept that the current governance arrangements including the lack of legal structure, lack of clear line management arrangements,  lack of communications oversight, lack of policy formation oversight carry significant risks, not least in terms of reputational damage to individuals, the SHA, and the Labour Party, as per the Governance Groups report and recommendations?

The work of the Governance Group evidence based, comprehensive and rooted in good practice, including other Labour Party affiliates. The views of the entire SHA membership had been sought on this work.

The group met with officers and staff and invited constructive suggestions on several occasions.

The group was told by officers that its work and recommendations were broadly welcomed. However the work was then publicly disparaged by Officers and the paid staff. The process was publicly misrepresented by the Officers who claimed not to have met with the Governance Group. The final Governance report was not published to members as requested. Officers instead submitted a separate tranche of changes to the AGM without reference to the Governance Group.

Most of the Governance Group’s proposals received majority support at the Council but not the required two thirds majority. However, this matter will not go away, Council should determine which Governance Group proposals need re-examining.

The GG recommended an Executive is needed to ensure the SHA follows through on decisions of the CC to tackle urgent matters.

 

The SHA is a membership organisation, tasked with contributing to the development of Labour Party health policy.

  •  How has the SHA enabled its membership as a whole, and its Central Council in particular, to effectively and efficiently feed into the LP policy development process?
  •  Does Council recognise concerns that – even taking into account limited resources – the SHA is not amplifying the expertise and experience of its membership, to identify and influence key areas for policy development?
  •  The system of policy formation is weak. Task and finish groups should be set up and supported to ensure this is done effectively.
  •  How is it ensured that public SHA statements are representative of agreed policy? When an SHA spokesperson disregards agreed SHA positions (or opens politically sensitive debates in an erratic fashion) how under the current arrangements – is that addressed and managed?

Concerns were raised in 2011 about how the SHA was being represented online, in public. We draw the CC’s attention to the Communications Protocol accepted by CC in 2011 as a proposed way forward. The issues persisted and in June 2013 the Editorial Board was installed to address these.

The EB was tasked with developing and ensuring best practice in communications and establishing a clear oversight of statements made by those representing the organisation in public. Its work was undermined by Officers.

An (uncosted) Mediation process was proposed and agreed in January 2014 to address what were presented as urgent issues. However, no effective action appears to have been taken by officers to expedite this and three months later these issues persist.

What oversight of the SHA’s online presence does CC propose and what accountability is there for what is published online under the SHA name? Eg in November 2014 the EB requested that a page was removed because it undermined agreed SHA positions four months later the article in question was reinstated without any consultation with CC.

In public representations and communications how does the SHA Leadership currently ensure that public statements promote and do not damage the reputation of either the LP or the SHA?

The SHA is a voluntary organisation and its greatest asset is its membership.

Like all voluntary organisations its effectiveness relies on the contribution and goodwill of its active members.

How has the SHA Leadership encouraged and supported current members who have volunteered to contribute to the work of the organisation and what measures has it taken to recruit new members?

We draw attention to the fact that currently at least three Central Council members are disabled; Central Council should ensure that all meetings are held in an accessible meeting place with accessible transport links – which has not always been the case.

We also note the inconsistencies in re-imbursement of travel and printing costs by volunteer Council members who incurred costs as part of agreed work.

Given the continued under-representation shown to women, ethnic minorities and disabled people, and the fact that members of these groups have highlighted a non equalities-friendly culture, what has the SHA Leadership (Officers and paid staff) undertaken to improve this sitaution and enable and support women, disabled and ethnic minority members to be actively involved in the SHA?

Call for Action

The SHA at UK level needs to consider all these matters. We need an SHA that is fit for purpose. We ask officers and Central Council, as well as the Director, to address these matters urgently and ensure that CC has sufficient time dedicated to discussing these matters at the July meeting of CC or at a specially called for

EGM and decide on necessary actions.

Harry Clarke

Noemi Fabry

Councillor Mike Roberts

Vice Chairs to March 2014

Prof Tony Beddow CC

Vivien Giladi CC

Judith Varley CC

Dr Thomas Fitzgerald CC & Auditor

Ali Syed MBE CC

Councillor Rachel Harris CC April 2013

Caroline Molloy—CC co-opted 2013-14

John Lipetz CC

Reposted for inclusion in the November Central Council meeting.

1 Comment

SHA Birmingham Central Council 1.9.18 in the Birmingham and Midlands Institute. The meeting opened at 1.30

Headings, significant actions and other matters in bold

Present:   Alex Scott-Samuel Chair (ASS), Andy Thompson Vice Chair (AT), Tom Fitzgerald Treasurer (TF), Alison Scouller (AS), David Mattocks, Vivien Walsh (VW), Paul Leake (PL), Caroline Bedale (CB), Mark Ladbrooke (ML), Catherine Grundy Glew (CGG), Steve Bedser (SB), Tony Beddow (TB), Irene Leonard (IL), Mike Roberts (MR), Helen Cranage (HC), Pater Mayer, Vivien Giladi (VG), John Lipetz (JL), Brian Fisher (BF), Allison Gardner (AG), Carol Ackroyd (CA), James Williamson (JW), Gurinder Singh Josan (GSJ), Corrie Lowry (CL), Judith Varley

Apologies for this meeting: Jean Hardiman Smith Secretary (JHS), Kathrin Thomas, Chris Bain, Colenzo Jarret-Thorpe, Dave Watson, David Davies, Guy Baily, Jacky Davis, Jessica Ormerod, Jon Shaffer, Katrina Murray, Sina Lari, Stephen Warren, Tony Jewell, Lawrence Cotter, Coral Jones, Diane Jones, Jane Roberts, Nico Csergo, Guy Collis, Shaun McBride, Jos Bell, Corrie Lowry

Leeds meeting amendments: present: Vivien Walsh, Peter Marshall    Apologies: Catherine Grundy Glew

Birmingham meeting    Observers:   None

2   Minutes of Leeds meeting: Several delegates were missed off the list of those present, others said they’d sent their apologies but these had not been recorded. Delegates must take personal responsibility for signing the attendance sheet. Apologies will be recorded if they’ve been seen. The Minutes were accepted with those amendments and an understanding that they are not a record of every comment or question

VG suggested delegates who had missed 2 successive CC meetings without apologies should be removed from CC and GSJ said branch Secretaries should be informed before any action was taken against delegates elected by branches. ASS said Officers would consider these matters

ML asked if paper work could be sent several days ahead of a meeting and together rather than piecemeal

AT will be looking at the website, how it functions and to provide access passwords

CB mentioned that the final window for contemporary motions is noon 13 September

MR said the Clarke commissioned Report should be on the Agenda for the next meeting, since some elements are not fit for purpose, others are out of date and the recommendations had not been agreed by CC in 2014. This and the call for Action Report should both be addressed by CC particularly as a more intelligible version is now available

There were discussions about points of order, dispute and dissent at the Leeds meeting and about how fully these should be recorded. ASS pointed out that minutes were never to be verbatim, only summaries. GSJ asked that points of order and action should be recorded and that delegates should understand the meaning of incorporation of the association because of liability problems which might arise in future. Was it a personal decision for a delegate to be replaced by someone else? ASS said that the ‘presumptive delegate’ at the Leeds meeting was attempting to substitute for an elected delegate who hadn’t resigned, so this was unconstitutional and unacceptable. JL suggested that delegates standing down and their replacements should notify CC. TB said that as a delegate based organisation, SHA regions / branches are responsible for selecting and de-selecting delegates but resignations are accepted and new delegates normally appointed at the end of the year. Points of Order are normally challenged under Standing Orders. Points of Order or Points of Information are often used to get a voice in situations where the individual might not otherwise be able to speak. Generally, matters are understood in accordance with the Labour Party Rule book.

JW questioned the process and said it should be fair and transparent. AT replied that he had spoken of ‘back channel pressures’ operating outside the meeting and in social media with the intention of influencing the outcome of the disciplinary hearing and therefore were NOT relevant to the meeting.

BF asked how delegates could intervene in the business of the meeting without Points of Order and was assured all members were able to express their views, and unscheduled items could be raised under AoB if they weren’t on the agenda. SB said the Chair had managed time thereby frustrating delegates wishing to speak at CC. As there were no guarantees of delegates being able to express ideas or challenges at CC, perhaps agenda items should be timed in future. ASS said long discourses were inappropriate, and he’s also keen on gender balance if possible.   CGG asked if contentious issues should be high on the agenda so there’s adequate time to air views

3   Chair’s Report: The disciplinary procedure is on-going involving a huge amount of work for the Officers and Vice Chairs. ASS formally thanked and congratulated all those who have taken part and for the support they have given

4   Secretary’s Report:   JHS was absent due to illness (see apologies), so there was no written report, but she and her husband, Ken, have already done enormous amounts of SHA admin work throughout the Summer for which both are thanked. JHS is continuing to run all admin functions. Comments and articles for facebook should be sent to her. Once official speakers are confirmed, she’ll advertise in the official LP Conference material though BF asked if this would be possible since there’s still no proper access to accounts. Commitments to premises and other arrangements for the SHA fringe meeting have been met. Membership lists are up-to-date though some have multiple inaccuracies, (to be reported more fully). Claims for expenses, including any outstanding expenses from previous meetings, should be sent to Jean along with bank account details if she hasn’t got them already. The expenses listed on the Birmingham attendance sheet have been sent to Jean. VW asked about the Manchester branch meeting arranged for 2 weeks time; Jean is in discussion with members about this. GSJ asked about the website development, which subgroups have been set up, who’s doing what etc… AT said he’d been fully occupied with the panel but would be asking for working group volunteers after the LP Conference. CB asked if anything could be shared with anyone else to relieve the load on Jean and Ken, but as matters are still so tangled, that’s not possible.

5   Treasurer’s Report   Access to bank accounts is still incomplete, compounding current problems. We cannot pay for meetings, local or national, without being sure we have funds to cover them, and changing signatories to the accounts has been difficult and is still underway. ASS has contacted previous signatories regarding their replacement so Officers can recover control and the process is still underway too. Formal agreement to the new signatories, Tom Fitzgerald, Alex Scott-Samuel and Jean Hardiman Smith has been recorded. Previous arrangements meant Martin Rathfelder had discharge of matters costing less than £500, the Treasurer, those of greater value. This report and changes were accepted and agreed unanimously by the meeting.   IL said there’d been a similar problem in the CLP, changes to signatories had to be notified by the Secretary on headed notepaper with the appropriate Minute and it all took time. ASS commented that 3 former signatories had been supportive but progress was slow as it entailed postal mail exchanges.   For the future, we need to consider having transfer forms for signatories already prepared. TF confirmed our purpose is to run campaigns, a key one currently being to save the NHS, and to support local SHA groups, Manchester branch has funds and Martin Rathfelder is its Treasurer. However, honouring our previous commitments prevents making further financial commitments to any branch event until we have access to all accounts, and claims cannot be backdated. Current travel re-imbursements can be met. ML said Oxford branch had raised £150 in a meeting held in one of the most deprived area of Oxford, and offered to loan money to branches in difficulty, with the proviso that branches should seek to raise their own funding. CB said she had been nominated to become Manchester branch Treasurer, but Martin Rathfelder had objected. TB wondered if Martin was Treasurer by default or had been elected and then AT blocked further discussion since it might affect the current process. BF said SHA needed a proper financial policy for central and peripheral matters

6   Labour Party matters. A proposal for Contemporary Resolution, on Social Care by Brian Fisher still needed a title but was open for endorsement by CC. JL asked that it be proposed in the spirit of Nye Bevan as was done in the health motion last year, social care should be free, universally available and publically funded. CA was thanked for her contribution and seconded the proposal. It was thought there was little chance of it being discussed at Conference but social care will be a big issue over the coming year. MR mentioned refs to the Green Paper including one entitled ‘Adult Social Care and Support’; support was low whilst demand was so high, and it all meant more pressure on the health service. The problems arising from not doing anything on social care whilst the government insists it’s the responsibility of the Local Authority are immense and it’s essential to focus on the impact of the National HEALTH Service. BF said the proposal needed debate since the current incumbent had no commitment to this motion, and whilst he (BF) thought it would get through the Contemporary Motion gate, he didn’t want it framed with impact on the NHS as it’s about social care. VG thanked BF and colleagues for their work but wanted permission to ‘tweak’ it to get it through various gates at Conference. ML commented on the crisis in social care funding with many regressive ideas. ASS asked for motions to be submitted to the Conference Committee via him or JHS, and by 20 Sept. Branches and CLPs should be encouraged to support it as it will go to a priority themes ballot. JHS or Coral Jones will be invited to the Composite Committee if it’s accepted. This year’s conference has NO slot for health and social care! SB offered tactical advice that each region should have a delegate branch meeting on Sunday am as this would enhance chances of the motion being called, and we should all seek local supporters for the Contemporary Motion. JL reminded us of the inadequacies of support for children’s and older people’s support. CA commented that a Report on the Crisis on Social Care had been published on 31 Aug. Public funding, free at point of access had been addressed. The Women’s Group need to deal with the infrastructure including ‘soft’ budget funding, some minor ‘tweaking’ is necessary. BF will not be at the Composite meeting and Jean and Coral need to be briefed. GSJ asked if delegates might contribute to the tweaking if they’re present as delegates. This was accepted by the meeting.

Women’s Group meeting. Decriminalisation of abortion across the UK had been popular and support was building. One motion can be selected to take forward to the main Conference. VG thanked AS for her work preparing this doc.

SHA fringe meetings   Maternity policy and Save Liverpool Women’s Hospital 12.30 – 2.30 Monday 24 Sept, chaired by Irene Leonard

Re-nationalising Social Care 6.00 – 8.00 Tuesday 25 Sept. Brian Fisher in conjunction with Health Campaigns Together. Eleanor Smith MP will speak at this meeting

Both the events detailed above will be at the Quaker Meting House, 22 School Lane, L1 3BT. One or both of these sessions will commemorate Julian Tudor Hart; they are open to all comers.

BF will also be submitting a Contemporary Motion on Social Care to the main LP Conference as described previously.

In addition, Sunday 23 Sept 11.00 at ‘The World Transformed’ at the Blackie there will be a session on NHS Campaigning with SHA, Health Campaigns Together and ‘Neon’

There will also be the march in support of the Liverpool Women’s Hospital led by Prof Wendy Savage on 22 Sept starting at 12.00 at the Hospital and arriving at the LP Conference site for speeches and the Socialist Singers at around 3.00

21 Sept   ‘Pensioners United’ screened at the Plaza in Crosby. Tickets via Eventbrite. John McDonnell likely to be present.

As we have missed the deadline to be in the printed programme, we must use social media and the app. To publicise SHA events. Targeting similar meetings and entrances with fliers works well in Liverpool. CB asked about the cost of doing this and whether personal underwriting is possible to us included in the official brochure.

7 Any Thompson’s interim Report on the Resolution of the Disciplinary Panel and Incorporation

Main points:

No one person should hold the logins, passwords and control of finances; all Officers should have access. The process and culture should be of transparency to everyone anywhere. The lack of policies has created massive difficulties. New financial arrangements will be instituted and best practices implemented.

SHA cannot continue as an unincorporated organisation; this needs urgent attention with liability / member expressly limited (likely to be £1). Employer’s liability insurance will cover risks.

The website should be bespoke, not ‘standard’; it needs urgent attention enabling Officers (and maybe some sub-groups) to access a full range of all SHA documents. Maintenance and development of the website is likely to take some time, but some immediate steps are needed.

The Disciplinary Panel work is in accordance with NHS Guidelines and is compliant with other systems. Legal advice will be sought if, when, where necessary. Several legal opinions might be sought; those associated with appointment tribunals might be appropriate. AT believes the disciplinary process is defensible, he wants prompt resolution without undue delay of the process for reasons of time, public discussion and in the interests of the members. David Wrigley who will chair the Appeal has had all the paper work and has reported to Jean.

Andy’s statement prompted comments, suggestions and questions which are summarised below.

They included recruitment procedures, affiliation to other organisations, competence, training needs for Officers, clear job descriptions – maybe needing HR analysis -, governance, accountability and responsibilities issues, and a Director subject to a contract which MUST be delivered. The Clarke Report, originally rejected, should now be revisited. SHA has an accountant, and the Labour Party can advise on some issues. For recruitment, it will be necessary to determine functions, and it seems likely that 1 person will be insufficient. MR suggested the Chair of Labour Business is a lawyer and might give cost effective advice. Sorting everything is a long process, and should not to be de-railed or fail for some minor problem. Key matters needed resolution, the 2014 report on the SHA website by a working group headed by Neomi Fabry should be looked at again.  AT’s recommendations would result in a long report, but when fully implemented, SHA would be professionally fit for the 21st century. BF commented that the process had been criticised but Andy’s recommendations should be taken seriously, and need to be seen as fair. SB said we needed to get the basics right first, and then tackle core policies; whilst robust advice must be paid for, the CVS might have some appropriate ‘off the shelf’ policies we could use alongside current practices to see if they were better. The Officers would agree how best to take forward the Report’s recommendations. JL thanked AT for his work and CC accepted and agreed his Report.

8 Policy Development Process   TB presented Kathrin Thomas’s paper which raised 3 points:   1 Individual members getting their ideas to CC via the delegate structure should first test them in the branches to remove glitches.   2 Is the policy group a filter before the policy commission?   3 new polices should be linked to those already existing. ASS said that as agreed by CC on June 9, TB is Vice Chair leading on policy and his brief includes making recommendations and picking up the work of Brian and the policy commission. ASS is the link to the shadow health team. BF commented that a rapid reaction process is needed – a turn-round of responses within half a day. Some way of CC agreeing something quickly is necessary, and a key matter is how a policy is finally signed off. It was suggested that any active policy discussion should be flagged up for delegates to contribute. CGG considered the time frame for passing policy and whether this allowed for adequate branch level discussion. Delegates were especially aware of the special situation of social care needing small group discussion. MR commented that a ‘Green Paper’ approach should be adopted; the whole of local government needs examining, public health, health inequalities, and the framework whereby best practice can be brought forward. IL proposed a discussion forum for the website. ML said consultation / engagement was very necessary and to bear in mind that International Aid under Theresa May was linked to trade deals and Trump policies. TB supported the Green Paper approach and said that CC should hold policy development sessions twice yearly. Public health gap analysis, carers issues, issues arising from combining health and social care and funding had all been addressed in the last year, all fairly heavy policy concerns yet the LP has no formal policy. What relationship did SHA have with the shadow team? Other players need to be influenced, like media, web-based discussions etc.. but may be beyond our technical competence. Volunteers? Mental health was assessed as needing £20 billion when MPs last considered NHS shortfalls. Serious debate on taxation policy was required. ASS asked for TB to develop this programme further and CC agreed this decision

AoB AT returned to technological concerns, particularly ways of engaging with members, including those in remote areas, in live discussion. Raising money is always difficult and he favoured a land value tax targeting the wealthy. CL voiced her concern about what we can all see happening in the country and hopes to see a more positive attack from the LP. AG commented that standards shpuld be developed and met, and collaborative on-line meetings should not be impossible to organise.

The meeting closed at 4.30     Date of next meeting Nov 10 London

Judith Varley   10.9.18

Leave a comment

The investigation into the issues raised in the scrutineers’ report is ongoing.  All aspects are being looked at including sight impairment and employee and governance issues.

Jos Bell, the Chair of London Branch raised the issue of disabled members not always being able to attend Central Council or needing support to do so.  The Officers have agreed a “buddy” system where CC members who are disabled and who attend will be the people who will vote, but if they are unable to be present, then a deputy, usually their “buddy” can vote on their branches’ behalf. This is in line with our support for people with disabilities.

I continue to liaise with the various branches, including recently the Scottish branch, and on the 21st April attended the West Midlands AGM as a visitor and speaker.  I should like to thank them for their warm welcome.

Scottish Branch.  I visited Dave Watson in Glasgow, and the officers believe that we could learn a lot from the devolved countries.  Dave has been working directly with the Scottish government, and I found him inspirational.  They have done a great deal of work and the officers feel it would be good to hold a cross nations conference on renationalisation drawing on experience from Wales, Scotland and Ireland.

I have been working with HCT and the NPC, led by Brian Fisher on Care.  Care is exceptionally complex, but its success is crucial the success of the NHS.  Our longer-term plans are still not decided, but we hope to have an update on cooperative working and perhaps a conference or two soon.  Brian and Dame June Clark, are presenting on Care to the NPC Pensioners’ Parliament.

Finally, I attended a day course at the London International development Centre on Healthcare and Critical Realism. It is a full day course, run on a Saturday, and is completely free.  The people running it are leaders in their field.  One of the people attending was Alan Taman, press for HCT, Steve carne was also on the attendee list.  It was useful for networking and inspirational.  There will be at least one other opportunity, so if you would like to know more please email me or phone.  I found it sharpened and focused my thinking, and it reinforces the way we tend to think and work on NHS and care matters.

Leave a comment

My apologies for not providing a written report at the AGM in March. 2017-18 has been a busy and fruitful year for the SHA. Following my ‘baptism of fire‘ – day 1 as Chair involved welcoming shadow SoS Jon Ashworth to the 2017 AGM – I was very pleased to welcome Jean Hardiman Smith, Tom Fitzgerald, Alison Scouller and Tony Beddow as honorary officers and vice chairs. It has been a pleasure to work with them and I am equally pleased with the addition of two further vice chairs, Diane Jones and Andy Thompson this year.

Membership

The membership of SHA – which had, as the bar chart shows, been static for many years – has increased exponentially during the last 15 months:

Membership numbers

My view is that this ‘epidermic of popularity‘ mirrors the ‘Corbyn effect‘ whereby the rediscovery of socialist values by the Labour Party has transformed its fortunes and made it the largest political party in Europe. I welcome also the increased number of SHA branches (see Director’s Report) and of branch delegates to Central Council.

Renationalising the NHS

Undoubtedly, another factor in our rapid increase in membership is our contemporary motion to Labour’s 2017 conference, which I had the privilege of compositing and subsequently proposing to conference last September. The motion, which was essentially about full renationalisation of the NHS in England, had been submitted by 25 CLPs in addition to SHA, with a further 15 submitting similar motions. It was carried unanimously by conference.

Since September SHA, along with many CLPs and health campaigning organisations, has advocated vigorously for full implementation of what is now Labour Party policy. Many Labour local authorities continue to cooperate with NHS England’s Five Year Forward View and Integrated Care Systems. Hence it was very welcome when the Guardian revealed last week Jon Ashworth’s commitment to consult in coming months on how an incoming Labour government should restructure a reinstated NHS based on Bevan’s original principles of universal, comprehensive, publicly provided care free at the point of use. I have offered our services to Jon and look forward to SHA working with him on this.

Organisation and development

My plans for strategic development were cut short by the 2017 general election and the need to focus on influencing the manifesto, creating a presence in marginal seats and short term outputs. These remain priorities, but the honorary officers and vice chairs have now discussed and agreed strategic development priorities and lead roles for 2018-19, as follows:

  • Operational management‘ – primarily within Jean’s role
  • Policy – Tony to lead
  • Website and associated issues – Andy to lead
  • Media / communications – Alex to lead
  • Membership / recruitment – Jean to lead
  • Liaison with labour movement, patient groups etc – Diane to lead
  • Maternity / health of women – Alison to lead
  • Liaison with parliaments / legislatures – to be agreed
  • Support to Chair – Alison

Once confirmed by Central Council, this division of labour will where relevant supplant existing roles and responsibilities and will be implemented by the officers and vice chairs as appropriate. I should make it clear that these are development priorities and are of course in addition to the fundamental roles of the Chair, Secretary and Treasurer.

Register of interests

It has been drawn to my attention that public sector bodies maintain registers of interests which are updated and declared at each meeting. This obviously helps ensure that all members are aware of their own and fellow members’ conflicts of interest, be they political, occupational or financial. I would welcome members’ views on whether Central Council should maintain a register of interests.

1 Comment

I’ve spent the last two months working on our contact lists so we can comply with the General Data Protection Regulations. I contacted most of the 36,000 people on our database.  That reduced the number to around 31,000.  Some people wanted to leave our database, many emails bounced, but 1300 wanted to stay on our list.  This gives us an opportunity to build a relationship with those people.  It isn’t very clear how the new rules apply to an organisation like the SHA.  They are concerned with marketting and the protection of personal information.   The vast majority of the contacts on our database who have not responded are not private individuals.  They are politicians, academics, local and national organisations, who advertise their contact details to the public.

We now have eight functioning branches.  The branch in Oxfordshire appears to be on the brink of viability and I’m hoping that we will manage to get at least one branch going in Yorkshire this year.

The membership of the association has continued to grow, though rather more slowly. Now at 1082 paid up members.  Analyzed by geography the current figures are:

Region Members Consented
Greater Manchester 292 294
Greater London 226 336
West Midlands 94 101
Yorkshire 67 142
Liverpool City Region 53 96
Tyne-Tees 52 57
Home Counties 49 70
South Wales 39 34
Scotland 36 66
Avon 35 80
Oxfordshire 28 23
East Anglia 28 64
East Midlands 22 63
Cheshire 20 28
Brighton 15 51
Devon & Cornwall 15 39
Staffordshire & Shropshire 15 29
Lancashire 13 37
Solent 5 21
North Wales 4 18
unknown 3 0
Kent 3 27
Rest of the World 3 7
Ireland 2 3
Dorset 0 17
Leave a comment

Speaker

The meeting opened with an address by Debbie Abrahams MP.  She gave us a brief but comprehensive summary of the difficulties we all see everywhere, every day, and tied them firmly to the Austerity policies introduced and implemented ruthlessly by the Coalition and Tory governments since 2010.  Widening inequality is THE biggest issue of our times, she said, greater here than elsewhere in Europe and in the OECD.  Income disparities are worse for the poor, with children and women losing out disproportionately, with impact on reducing growth too.  None of these matters were recognised in the Chancellor’s Spring statement, though they had all been foreseen by Theresa May when she was Home Secretary.  England has become the country of poor pay, job insecurity and the ‘self employed’, (most earning less than a living wage).  Debt was flat-lining as a whole, but has increased in the poorest of the population.  Education should be about preparing children for life, not just as workers and social security should provide for those out of work, children, the elderly and those who have become sick and disabled; with £34 billiion cuts already and more to come, the policy was an absolute failure.

The largest wealth determinants are land and property, and as fewer people own these, and their holdings have increased, they have led to further increased generational and power inequalities – the business of who makes the decisions and how.  Add to these factors, lower investment and a shift in funds from poorer to wealthier areas, we now have differences reminiscent of Victorian times.  Relating funding to the age profile, England is now below the EU average, public spending is down and life expectation down too (Marmot June and Dec 2017), whilst the state pension age has risen.  In England, 300,000 more pensioners are in poverty than in 2010, 4 million children in poverty are in working households, with CPAG estimating 900,000 are under 5 years.  3.7 million disabled people have had social service cuts since the Health and Social Security Act (2012), with twice as many now living in poverty.  Although 4 million disabled people want to work, only 25,000 have found paid employment.  Disabled access to a full public life, employment and other opportunities continues to be poor or absent contradicting the manifesto mantra, ‘Nothing about me, without me’.  This is a catalogue of failure at the most basic levels.  She ended by suggesting we need a new social contract, a Beveridge for our times.

Debbie was thanked for her contribution.

*

Action points in BOLD

Agenda with apologies

Minutes of the 2017 Annual General Meeting

Accepted by Vivien Giladi and seconded by Mike Roberts

Elections

Alex Scott-Samuel as Chair and Jean Hardiman Smith as Secretary had been re-elected unopposed

Tom Fitzgerald was re-elected as Treasurer

Two auditors were appointed, Councillor Mark Ladbrooke, nominated by Tom Fitzgerald and seconded by Helen Cranage, and James Gill, self nominated and seconded by Mike Roberts.

A new position of Minutes Secretary was suggested by Jean Hardiman Smith and Judith Varley was proposed  by Vivien Giladi, seconded by Helen Cranage

Twenty new Central Council  members had been elected. Several branch AGMs had been held shortly before the Central Council AGM.  This had led to confusion as some branch Central Council delegates were also present on the national Central Council list of candidates for election.

Vivien Walsh was thanked for her work as election scrutineer and for her timely report.  The second scrutineer’s report was not yet available.  The election results were accepted and the officers needed to see the second scrutineer’s report.  Mike Roberts suggested outstanding issues should be examined by the officers to give a rapid response, with confidentiality for any additional areas of concern.

Jean Hardiman Smith apologised that her report was still as notes currently.

Constitutional amendments

It had been proposed and agreed at an earlier CC meeting that branch AGMs should have at least 4 weeks notice given, and ordinary branch meetings 2 weeks. John Lipetz proposed a further amendment – that in addition to this, branch AGMs should be held well before the national AGM. Further debate led to agreement that branch elections should be concluded no less than 3 and no more than 12 weeks prior to the national Central Council ballot being circulated so that branch delegates already on Central Council did not contest national places.  A clarifying statement was added to the effect that anyone succeeding in a branch election to Central Council will not be eligible to stand in the national election in that cycle.

Martin Rathfelder had proposed that SHA should in future have 2 rather than 4 vice chairs and they should have honorary officer status.  Andy Thompson was in favour of keeping 4.  Caroline Bedale suggested up to 4 vice chairs be retained in order to support special areas of work and to prepare reports for the AGM. The amendment was withdrawn.

Venues

It was agreed that Martin should have 3 weeks advance notice of any proposed change of dates/venues for either Central Council or AGM

Women’s Group

With more women amongst Central Council delegates, a Women’s Group with a core of 3 CC members should be inaugurated, and it would need to meet to be effective.  Alison Scouller covered maternity issues and she commented that in practice it was difficult to arrange meetings since everyone was so busy.

Grievance procedure

Mark Ladbrooke said SHA needed a grievance policy, perhaps based on that of the Labour Party.  Grievance issues should not be raised at the AGM. (NB SHA does have a a grievance procedure)

Annual Report

Martin commented that membership was increasing substantially (now provisionally 964) and new branches were being created – all welcome developments, although the distribution of branches was concentrated in safe Labour areas.  Could all members think about recruiting members in neighbouring Tory areas?

Tony Beddow had long thought a review of SHA organisation was overdue considering the skills, competences, gaps in expertise etc amongst Central Council delegates, and proposed some professional backup working with Martin.  (???Mark Appleby) suggested we should welcome more disabled members recognising that they might need further support, financial and other to participate.  Tony Jewell commented that his locale, Fenland, was large and diffuse and it was difficult to organise a local group – suggestions as to how this could be done and how many people were needed to create a viable branch etc.. would be welcome.  SHA should try to attract more young (defined as under 27) and BAME members.  In general, more structure was needed to help new members and more local  activities organised, but in general, local groups giving opportunities for members to meet, discuss, connect, pick up ideas for campaigns etc.. were all beneficial.   Martin said national funds were available to pay for meeting rooms for branch meetings.  Organisational issues to be on the next Central Council agenda

Tony Beddow said that affiliation costs to the Welsh Labour Party had risen 4-fold from £60 – this was on the basis that SHA was equivalent to a Union and had at least 1000 members.  This needs to be taken up at national level.  Martin has raised the issue of affiliation costs previously and will take it up with the Democracy Review.

Tony Jewell suggested we could gift aid subscriptions to the David Stark Murray Trust, think in terms of legacies and investigate and revive it – all and Martin to do.

Caroline Bedale wanted information about local branch activities and Martin said he would organise a page for each branch on the website for this purpose.

Affiliations

Affiliation to other organisations were agreed as follows:  The Labour Party, Medact, James Lind Alliance (supports evidence based medicine), Smoke Free Action, KONP, Health Campaigns Together (HCT), Equality Trust, and European Public Health Alliance.  New NHS Alliance was disaffiliated although Brian Fisher, a NNA officer, spoke in its support.   Vivien Giladi stated that HCT was moving towards building solid links with Trade Unions.  Tony O’Sullivan said KONP groups were maximising working together and had a new website. A London demonstration for the 70th birthday of the NHS on 30 June was planned and they were working on the Naylor Report and Virgin Healthcare.

Resolutions:

1  Caroline Walsh, represented at the meeting by Martin, was involved in the Handbook on the Equality Act.  The Act applied to all organisations including the SHA.  It should be easier for people to participate, perhaps electronically.  This was welcomed, we would commend it to the Labour Party and make a financial contribution to effecting it.  Meetings might be streamlined – the Manchester youth group might help with this. 

This Association welcomes the legal handbook “Equality Act 2010 (disability) and the Labour Party” produced by the Disability Equality Act Labour group. The hard work that has gone into this document by disabled members and experts in the field are to be commended. We commend the handbook to the Labour Party and call for it to be accepted, in its entirety, as official Party guidance. We agree to make a donation of £50 towards a print run to enable the group to make the handbook available at Party events including conference.

The resolution was carried.

Future meetings

Our meetings need to move around the country, and care taken to review dates we have already and to avoid clashes with other meetings

Policy discussions

Brian Fisher reported on the work with the Labour shadow health team.  A small group had tackled Primary Care initially, specifically the independent status of GPs, the Out of Hours situation, Social Care and how to integrate it.  They aimed to develop a brief leaflet, 3 pp in soundbite sentences.  The front bench want expertise, not necessarily from the SHA or Labour Party members.  Jacky Davis asked how we know group recruits agree with our views.  Brian stressed that confidentiality was crucial throughout and that policy was not a ‘silo’ situation – housing, education, socio-economic factors all contributed.  The people to speak on other topics had not been decided, but the numbers must be small and security ‘tight’.  Mental health was to be covered next

Central Council meeting

The AGM was followed by a brief Central Council meeting at which four vice chairs were elected. Two women – Alison Scouller and Diane Jones – were nominated and elected unopposed. X men were nominated, and Tony Beddow and Andy Thompson were elected.

Leave a comment

NB it has not been possible to audit the accounts in time for the AGM. An audit report will be produced for the Central Council.

Income £33,005.05
Expenditure £30,311.98
unattributed income £0.00
Surplus £2,693.07

 

31.12.2016 31.12.2017
Cash at Bank
14 Day £23,910.26 £27922.28
Instant £0.00 £0.00
Paypal £1,488.27 £181.96
Current £1,137.54 £996.44
Total £26,536.07 £29,100.68
Increase in funds at bank £2,583.56
Credited late £0.00 £0.00
Cashed late £18.95 £0
overpayment £0.00 £0.00
Surplus £0.00 £0.00
Discrepancy £67.63 -£128.46
Balance at bank £26,517.12 £29,081.73
Leave a comment

This content is password protected. To view it please enter your password below:

Enter your password to view comments.

2017 was a good year for the Association.  We saw a big increase in our membership and our new Chair  managed to organise a resolution about the NHS which was carried unanimously by the Labour Party conference to great acclaim.  We finally managed to make some progress on our policy discussions, both internally and in discussion with the Labour health team. Over the past couple of years it has been difficult to organise events because the volatile political situation, and elections, both external and internal, have diverted people’s attention. But now it seems possible. We organised a very high powered conference on public health which gives us some excellent policy building blocks.  We are now in a much better position to help developing Labour health and care policies. 

Membership

We started the year with 683 members and finished with 792.  141 joined during the year.  52 are in arrears. Some may have joined only to vote in the leadership election.  A lot of new members have joined using PayPal. PayPal notifies us if they cancel their annual payment

 

Members by geography based around branches, or potential branches.

area Current members
Greater London 202
West Midlands 96
Manchester 84
Yorkshire 57
Liverpool 52
Tyne-Tees 44
Home Counties 40
Wales 41
Scotland 35
Avon 35
East Midlands 28
Fenland 26
North Midland 25
Oxfordshire 18
Plymouth 16
Brighton 12
Preston 10
Kent 7
Rest of the World 5
Solent/Dorset 7
Ireland 2

Members classified by type.

Most members could be put in several classes, and for many I don’t know enough about them to put them in a category. But this gives some indication of our varied membership

Number TYPE
115 Labour activists
71  Individuals
57 Public health
53 Mental illness
49 GPs
44 Doctors
43 Cllrs – Labour
30 KONP etc
29 Academics
28 Non-execs
27 Secondary care
27 Nurses
23 MPs & peers – Lab
20 TU – health
19 CLP officers
15 Social care
14 CHC/HW Members etc
13 Management Health
12 Dentists
9 Community Health
8 Councillor Health lead lab
8 PPI staff
7 Socialist Societies
7 Elderly people
6 FT governors
6 Students
6 Professions allied to medicine
6 Pharma
5 Babies families, maternity,
5 Clinical science
5 CCG staff
5 Freelancers
5 Disabled people organsations
5 Carers

 


Year
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
Current members 651 677 654 672 683 792
Website Pages 915 974 1019 1043 1163
Website Posts 530 436 1124 1501 1853
Website Comments (cumulative) 2272 2501 2257 2863 3370
Website Page Views 338,415 375,511 410,000 382,045 408,288 347,000
Unique Visitors 131,303 158,180 181,281 171,000 204,596 171,062
Followers of the blog 360 418
Twitter Followers  1365 2845 4178 4839 5687 6104
Tweets (cumulative) 16,578 12,522 38,100 47,700 55,200
Facebook likes (cumulative) 1488 1757 1975 2067 2129 2349
Tweet impressions

(cumulative)

137,1800 204,700 322,400
Contacts database 40,888 42,310 39,039 36,292 36,242 35,993
Website Google Page Rank 5 4 4 4 4 4
Domain Authority 41 44

Affiliations

Unite didn’t manage to actually pay their affiliation fee in 2017, but this seems to be administrative confusion rather than a political decision and I hope their cheque is in the post.

We discovered during 2017 that socialist societies are allowed to have up to 5 delegates to each CLP, and this has been a useful recruitment incentive.  We haven’t paid much attention to this process before, but we may need to establish a procedure to enable members in a constituency to decide which of them should be delegates if we have more than 5 volunteers.  I think the only practicable approach to this is that any member who volunteers can be our delegate unless there is some reason to object.  This is a decision for branches, and for the officers in places where there is no active branch.

I put a lot of effort into supporting members in places where we didn’t have functioning branches – Staffordshire, Cornwall, Southport, North Wales, Cheshire, Shropshire, Yorkshire and Sussex and I’m pleased to report that we finished the year with more branches than we started.  But I don’t expect to see functioning branches in all those places any time soon.

This year we finally gave up on the paper version of our magazine, Socialism and Health, published fairly regularly and sent to all our members since 1965.  We weren’t alone. The Health Service Journal also abandoned its print edition this year.

Our website still attracts a lot of traffic, and the historical material gets a lot of appreciation.  But our on-line presence is not as active as I would like. I maintain an active Twitter feed, but our Facebook page is not very active.  I experimented with paid adverts on Facebook but that didn’t seem to be very effective, and we need to think harder about our work in this area.

External relationships

We have done our best to support Health Campaigns Together during the year, both with money and publicity. Salford University, quite uninvited, established a scheme to give SHA members reduced fees for their conferences. I’ve also done my best to help the Labour Campaign for Mental Health and Disability Labour. I’ve been co-opted to the executive of the NHS Active Alliance and the Transport and Health study group. And I’ve been encouraging the establishment of Doctors at the Deep End in Manchester. But close working with the other socialist societies is still more of an aspiration than a reality.

Money

Our income has been fairly buoyant this year, partly because of the increase in subscriptions, and partly because of advertising from the website. We have devised a method of publishing advertisements which makes them invisible, but satisfies the advertisers, who are actually only interested in getting a link which Google recognizes from our site to theirs. But our expenditure was considerably higher than expected. This was partly because of the public health conference – the most expensive event we have ever run, despite a contribution of £2000 from the David Stark Murray Trust, and partly because of a substantial increase in members expenses. We have more disabled members and officers than we used to and their costs are considerably greater than those of able bodied people.

Tagged | Leave a comment

Sheffield Quaker Meeting House 13 January 2018

Present: Mike Roberts. Tony Beddow, Peter Mayer, Vivien Walsh, Rene Smit, Lawrence Cotter, Steve Bedser, Brian Fisher, Irene leonard, Gurinder S Josan, Alison Scouller, Alex Scott-Samuel

In attendance:  Martin Rathfelder, John Carlisle, Deborah Cobbett, Dave Shields, Simon Duffy, Jim Steinke

Apologies for absence: Caroline Walsh, Jean Hardiman Smith, Helen Cranage, David Mattocks, Katrina Murray, Jos Bell, Colenzo Jarrett-Thorpe, Andy Thompson, James Gill, Mike Grady, Judith Varley, Tom Fitzgerald, Neil Nerva, Vivien Giladi, Brian Gibbons, David Davies, John Lipetz

1.Minutes of the meeting in Chester  were agreed as accurate

2. Matters arising

  1. SHA policy on maternity services: Alison and others are interested in developing our maternity policy. She has a draft in preparation. She was encouraged to keep a wide perspective, including for instance, mental health. Alison will circulate as it develops and link in Brian.
  2. Young Labour/recruitment: We had a delegate, James Gill, to the Young Labour conference. A resolution was passed on Mental Health. More thoughts from the young members to be collected to discuss recruiting. Martin is trying to get a list of secretaries of Labour Students. MedSin could be a useful organisation for recruitment.
  3. NHS 70th anniversary materials: Martin had a meeting with design expert and is expecting some ideas shortly. Plans to reprint  “In Place of Fear” Designer was interested in  Socialist Health socks? Note to Jon Ashworth – what plans for 70th anniversary? A joint letter from Jon and SHA to all LP members? A note for many of us to write on the NPF website about this issue.

3. Director’s report – Martin had produced a written report which will go to the AGM.

Discussion re West Midlands and branch catchment areas generally. Tony says we don’t know which of our members are also members of the Labour Party. SHA already has delegates to all the CLPs in Wales. If we write to all members, we could ask whether they are party members? Martin creates categories of people in the database, selecting for skills. People could be filed under many categories if they have many skills. Martin will investigate the General Data Protection Regulation  rules as they apply to SHA.

At the moment, any SHA member who is a Party member can become a CLP delegate. MR will consult officers if there are more than 5 members wanting to be delegates to a CLP if they are not in a branch. Tony: Should they be mandated? He will write a discussion document for officers.

4. Labour Party matters:

  1. Follow up of Conference resolution
    Alex: composite 8 effectively proposed renationalising the NHS. Some aspects of the policy appear not to have been followed through properly. There are, for instance, no new campaign materials reflecting the new Labour Party policy as result of it. Tony: the NPF has been struck by the Composite and will be discussing it specifically in early Feb. Mike: silence is deafening from LP re Comp8. Tony: renationalizing the NHS will be expensive, eg buying out care homes to nationalise social care. Labour is in power in some areas– advice is needed for those who want and need to make decisions about local planning beyond saying no to ACOs. Local discussions may be best. A meeting will be set up to address this in Sheffield
  2. Socialist Societies
    The Democracy Review may result in better participation for SocSocs. One suggestion is for SocSocs to share administration. Alex had meeting with the Review team and he circulated the list of questions that had been raised:

These are questions which arose during an initial discussion with members of the Democracy Review.

  1. Should membership of SHA and other socialist societies be open to Labour party members only?
  2. Should block voting continue in Labour Party elections?
  3. Should socialist societies be funded by subscriptions or by the Labour Party?
  4. Can socialist societies’ representation on the NEC be justified?
  5. Should there be a Socialist Societies Forum?
  6. Should there be defined eligibility criteria for the recognition of socialist societies?
  7. How should the existence of several societies focusing on a single issue be dealt with (eg JLM, JVL; Fabians, Momentum)?
  8. Can joining socialist societies be seen as buying power?
  9. Should conference policy carry executive authority with Labour councils and councillors?
  10. How should the London-centric nature of the socialist societies executive be dealt with?
  11. How can Labour Party policy be ‘gender proofed’?
  12. How can Labour be engendered?

A long discussion suggested overall that:

  • we need to allow non-party members to be members of SHA, because they have enormous skills. But we need to find a mechanism to keep party issues only to party members. And non-LP members should not oppose LP policies.
  • The party cannot insist that there is only one SocSoc per topic or group.
  • There should be criteria that define what constitutes a SocSoc but there are many practical issues in enforcing any fixed criteria.
  1. Policy development process from here: The SHA is in conversation with the Shadow Team on policy development. The topics are confidential. Brian outlined an approach to getting the best people to discuss with the Shadow Team and this was agreed: we shall request a 100 word document from all members and the policy team will shortlist. If needed, we shall ensure that we add to that list specific skills needed. Despite concern, the need for confidentiality was agreed. A key issue is the financing streams the whole manifesto can draw on and the demands coming from the different spending departments.

6. AGM and elections Notice to go out shortly

  1. AOB
    MR asked us all to sign up to be governors of the Manchester Trust

Dave: contact LP governors and ask to them to become members of SHA
Alison: A Welsh BBC programme is looking for women with experience or information on back-street abortions.
Brian: There will be a Demo 3rd Feb responding to the Winter NHS crisis.

  1. Next meeting:  Annual General Meeting

 

Leave a comment

2017 was a good year for the Association.  We saw a big increase in our membership and our new Chair  managed to organise a resolution about the NHS which was carried unanimously by the Labour Party conference to great acclaim.  We finally managed to make some progress on our policy discussions, both internally and in discussion with the Labour health team. Over the past couple of years it has been difficult to organise events because the volatile political situation, and elections, both external and internal, have diverted people’s attention. But now it seems possible. We organised a very high powered conference on public health which gives us some excellent policy building blocks.  We are now in a much better position to help developing Labour health and care policies. 

We have managed to re-establish working branches of the Association in Liverpool, Cheshire, and, hopefully, Manchester. We need to do more to get to know our new members and involve them in our activities.  We have been doing our best to support Labour parties in the places where it matters – marginal constituencies.  That isn’t easy, because our members, unsurprisingly, are mostly in places where Labour is in a majority.  But we have been doing what we can in Southport, North Wales, Cornwall and the marginal seats in London.  And we need to do more to get our new members involved.

This year we finally gave up on the paper version of our magazine, Socialism and Health published fairly regularly and sent to all our members since 1965.  We weren’t alone.  The Health Service Journal also abandoned its print edition this year.

It’s not clear yet what the outcome of the Labour Party’s democracy review will be, but it has already had the beneficial effect of bringing the Socialist Societies closer together.  We hope to work more closely with them next year.  Too often we find people in the Labour Party with a keen professional interest in health who didn’t know we existed, and the other societies have similar problems.

This year we are looking forward to the NHS 70th birthday celebrations in July.

Year201220132014201520162017
Current members651677654672683792
Website Pages 915974101910431163
Website Posts530436112415011853
Website Comments (culmulative)22722501225728633370
Website Page Views338,415375,511410,000382,045408,288347,000
Unique Visitors131,303158,180181,281171,000204,596171,062
Followers of the blog360418
Twitter Followers (culmulative)136528454178483956876104
Tweets (culmulative)16,57812,52238,10047,70055,200
Facebook likes (culmulative)148817571975206721292349
Tweet impressions137,1800204,700322,400
Contacts database40,88842,31039,03936,29236,24235,993
Website Google Page Rank544444
Domain Authority4144
Tagged | Leave a comment
%d bloggers like this: