150,277 members

Skip to content. | Skip to navigation


Testing for rotten apples and bad eggs


Blog headlines

Friday, 5 July 2013

Testing for rotten apples and bad eggs

The government is introducing stringent new measures to prevent a repeat of Mid Staffs and similar scandals. In future senior NHS managers will be required to satisfy a fit and proper person test before being appointed.

Admitting that until now “almost anyone could run a hospital”, a government spokesman said: “Patients have a right to know that the people in charge of NHS services are up to the job.”

The move is the latest in a series of government initiatives in response to recommendations made in the Francis report, starting with the easy ones.

The new test is designed to screen out:

  • Former members of the Hitler Youth League
  • Anyone with a conviction for arms dealing, drug running or people trafficking
  • Suicide bombers
  • Ex presidents of Egypt
  • Men with beards

The test has been designed by some of the country’s top HR consultants.

The government spokesman said: “Sophisticated psychometric techniques have been deployed to make it impossible for undesirables to slip through the net.”

Questions include:

  • Have you ever killed anyone in a previous job?
  • Are you happy for us to take up references from other fit and proper persons?
  • Have you been press trained?
  • Do you promise to do your best?
  • Do you have a clean driving licence?

The friends and family test has also been specially adapted to weed out unsuitable candidates. Applicants for senior posts will be asked “How likely is it that you would recommend yourself a large pay-off if things don’t work out?”

Any candidate scoring a pension pot of less than £1m will be “highly unlikely” to make it through to the second stage of interviews.

Critics of the new measures pointed out that the test would not apply to NHS England, clinical commissioning groups or ministers of state, but the government insisted that other versions of the test would follow in due course.

A fit and proper commissioner test will check the credentials of anyone trying to close a hospital, a fit and proper patient test will be used to identify hypochondriacs and health tourists, and legislation for a fit and proper politician test will fail to make it past a first reading in the House of Commons.

Propriety editor: NHS Networks

Anonymous says:
Jul 05, 2013 09:05 AM
Very well written ... I think the screening test would have to specify if the beard is for cosmetic reason than they would be excluded otherwise they can still apply???
Anonymous says:
Jul 05, 2013 10:49 AM
definately not being a killjoy, these blogs are normally very good but i think this one does overstep the mark a little. It has offended at least one of my colleagues.
Anonymous says:
Jul 05, 2013 10:55 AM
I really enjoyed the blog, good to be able to have a satirical laugh every now and again. Don't worry about the offended ones, in these modern times anything can offend anyone at any time. Take me, I’m offended by the offended ones been offended.
Anonymous says:
Jul 05, 2013 11:06 AM
Large earlobes ,another sign of a criminal and a pronounced limp, pronounced L-I-M-P is also another sign and pretending they are Spider Man on dress down Fridays. I agree its easy to be offended by the offended when they are offended.
Anonymous says:
Jul 05, 2013 12:46 PM
If this had stuck to pay and competence, fine. But it didn't. It's satirizing the causing of people's death.
Julian Patterson
Julian Patterson says:
Jul 05, 2013 01:50 PM
The idea is not to offend, but is it only okay to satirise incompetence that doesn't cause death?
Anonymous says:
Jul 08, 2013 10:14 AM
Julian, your question is a good one but, on this occasion, perhaps the wrong one. Your item crossed a line from deaths due to incompetence, to suggesting an element of deliberate intent. Omitting explicit mention of 'Francis' would have been better.
Anonymous says:
Jul 08, 2013 12:01 PM
I don't think that satirizing "deaths" which are a result of nonsense statistics should cause anyone offence, on the contrary, they warrant ridicule.


How *many* people died unnecessarily?


So - sounds like probably no unnecessary deaths, just a lot of erroneous statistics and a great opportunity for misinformation and propaganda.
paul booton
paul booton says:
Jul 09, 2013 05:33 PM
Very funny, very pithy, very good. All very convenient to blame individuals when government targets, structural issues and inadequate spending are at the heart of the problem