Cambridge Mental Health Summit: Will words be turned into action??

Rethink’s Paul Jenkins had kicked off the event by stating that today was to be a discussion about the coalition government’s new strategy and how it will affect mental health provision as a whole, and specifically in the Cambridgeshire area.

Paul said that the real tests would be, “GP’s demonstrating that they understand mental health, making sure that patients and carers will be at the centre of things, and the levelling of standards in mental health including improved access for all.”

Paul then handed over to Andrew Lansley who initially came across as relaxed and informed. Time would tell just how informed, and how he would react to the questions posed by attendees.

He started by stating that the new government’s Health and Social Care Bill was a joint coalition strategy. He said that it will lead to an NHS focused on patients with ‘No Decision About Me, Without Me’. This would lead to “a better experience for all”.

Lansley said  that he wanted ‘care pathways’ and not just ‘procedures’. He wanted earlier intervention, better links between the mental and physical health needs of patients, and more research. He also wanted an opening up of healthcare provision to the voluntary and commercial sectors and a huge push to tackle stigma and discrimination.

Next up were speakers Ianand Carl, who are both recovering residents at Kneesworth Hospital in Royston. Ian spoke as a Service User and someone who has also been a doctor involved in mental health care. Ian painted a realistic picture of some of the problems the current system faces.

Dr Ed Garrett spoke next. He was from NHS East of England. He talked about developing GP Consortiums. Apparently Cambridge is a hotbed of consortium development.

Dr Caroline Lea-Cox from CATCH (The Cambridge Association to Commission Health) was the final speaker, and talked about the need for more patient engagement, equal and fair access, physical and mental health link up, access to talking therapies and a ‘lifespan approach to mental health care.’ Interestingly she highlighted how keen CATCH is very keen for Service Users to get involved with their work.

After the introductory speeches it was time for questions from the floor. This was the time to put the panel on the spot!

The first question challenged the expansion of GP commissioning in mental health. Lansley answered that GP’s already see a huge number of mental health cases and can be beneficial as far as the physical health needs of mental health Service Users are concerned.

The next question was how do volunteers get involved with GP’s if they want to be more involved with the commissioning of services? At this point Lansley talked about care pathways and the quality of service provision. He seemed to be going off on a tangent a little, but the entire panel agreed that Service User input was vital.

Someone mentioned how badly mental health arts therapy funding had already been hit. Caroline Lea-Cox from CATCH answered that there had obviously been a ‘public service squeeze’ and that arts therapy outcomes will be ‘difficult to predict’.

A delegate  from VoiceAbility, the advocacy organisation, asked if payment by results will be a threat to smaller voluntary providers and that quality should be more of a consideration than just cost.

Lansley answered that, “Payment by Results will be extended. A good example is Lewisham where a set price was agreed and all who could match that price would then be judged on quality before being granted service provision”. 

The final question of the day was from a Citizens Advice Bureau mental health advisor who brought the panel’s attention to cuts it was facing to its legally based services. Lansley said that David Cameron has been clear that he wants to support legal services.


So how do I think it went?

It was an enjoyable, well organised event at a lovely venue, a great turnout and some good speakers. The summit seemed to be well received by attendees. To Andrew Lansley’s credit he answered questions well, although I did think that he was answering to a set agenda at times.

Time will tell just how honourable the new government’s intentions are, and if the new proposed structure to mental health services will be a success.