<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments for Radical Statistics Group</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.radstats.org.uk/comments/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.radstats.org.uk</link>
	<description>Using statistics to support progressive social change</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 08 Mar 2012 06:07:47 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Moral panic about overpopulation: the distracting campaign of Population Matters by Case Study 17: Is the problem really unemployment? &#171; Sheila&#039;s Blog</title>
		<link>http://www.radstats.org.uk/moral-panic-about-overpopulation-the-distracting-campaign-of-population-matters/#comment-13</link>
		<dc:creator>Case Study 17: Is the problem really unemployment? &#171; Sheila&#039;s Blog</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 08 Mar 2012 06:07:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://radstats.wordpress.com/?p=252#comment-13</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] Moral panic about overpopulation: the distracting campaign of Population Matters (radstats.wordpress.com) [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Moral panic about overpopulation: the distracting campaign of Population Matters (radstats.wordpress.com) [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Statistics Canada cuts five more surveys by Another Statistics Canada chief quits over cuts and control &#124;</title>
		<link>http://www.radstats.org.uk/statistics-canada-cuts-five-more-surveys/#comment-4</link>
		<dc:creator>Another Statistics Canada chief quits over cuts and control &#124;</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 15 Feb 2012 10:05:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://radstats.wordpress.com/?p=91#comment-4</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] contributions to official statistical methods.  These cuts to the Canadian Census and other surveys caused an outcry and fears of similar downgrading of the statistical base in other countries, as [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] contributions to official statistical methods.  These cuts to the Canadian Census and other surveys caused an outcry and fears of similar downgrading of the statistical base in other countries, as [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Details revealed: UK government social research and statistics cuts by We need central data collection to make localism work &#171; Localism Club: pioneering people power</title>
		<link>http://www.radstats.org.uk/details-revealed-uk-government-social-research-and-statistics-cuts/#comment-9</link>
		<dc:creator>We need central data collection to make localism work &#171; Localism Club: pioneering people power</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 04 Nov 2011 12:06:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://radstats.wordpress.com/?p=159#comment-9</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] to the value of data and to central government&#8217;s role in collecting data. Budget cuts have seen evidence collection slashed across departments and at the Office for National Statistics at precisely the time when targeting [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] to the value of data and to central government&#8217;s role in collecting data. Budget cuts have seen evidence collection slashed across departments and at the Office for National Statistics at precisely the time when targeting [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Moral panic about overpopulation: the distracting campaign of Population Matters by George Papaioannou</title>
		<link>http://www.radstats.org.uk/moral-panic-about-overpopulation-the-distracting-campaign-of-population-matters/#comment-12</link>
		<dc:creator>George Papaioannou</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 28 Oct 2011 00:36:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://radstats.wordpress.com/?p=252#comment-12</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[really interesting evidence. I have to read a bit on these.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>really interesting evidence. I have to read a bit on these.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Editorial: Cuts and Corporations Conference issue by The Best Colleges</title>
		<link>http://www.radstats.org.uk/editorial-cuts-and-corporations-conference-issue/#comment-11</link>
		<dc:creator>The Best Colleges</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 10 Oct 2011 16:44:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://radstats.wordpress.com/?p=246#comment-11</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[We wanted to let you know that your blog was included in our list of the top 50 statistics blogs of 2011. Our goal was to highlight blogs that students and prospective students will find useful and interesting in their exploration of the field. 

You can view the entire list at http://www.thebestcolleges.org/best-statistics-blogs/

Congratulations!]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>We wanted to let you know that your blog was included in our list of the top 50 statistics blogs of 2011. Our goal was to highlight blogs that students and prospective students will find useful and interesting in their exploration of the field. </p>
<p>You can view the entire list at <a href="http://www.thebestcolleges.org/best-statistics-blogs/" rel="nofollow">http://www.thebestcolleges.org/best-statistics-blogs/</a></p>
<p>Congratulations!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on US statistical abstract and Federal financial statistics by radstatswebeditor</title>
		<link>http://www.radstats.org.uk/us-statistical-abstract-and-federal-financial-statistics/#comment-10</link>
		<dc:creator>radstatswebeditor</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 23 Mar 2011 18:13:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://radstats.wordpress.com/?p=187#comment-10</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[See also a post to further information at http://lyndamk.com/2011/03/23/stats-abstract-not-just-a-govdocs-issue/]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>See also a post to further information at <a href="http://lyndamk.com/2011/03/23/stats-abstract-not-just-a-govdocs-issue/" rel="nofollow">http://lyndamk.com/2011/03/23/stats-abstract-not-just-a-govdocs-issue/</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Details revealed: UK government social research and statistics cuts by tim chapman</title>
		<link>http://www.radstats.org.uk/details-revealed-uk-government-social-research-and-statistics-cuts/#comment-8</link>
		<dc:creator>tim chapman</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 26 Feb 2011 20:33:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://radstats.wordpress.com/?p=159#comment-8</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[As former Chair of a NICE research project looking at Spatial Planning and Health prematurely ended by the Government (Department of Health in this case), I would be interested whether you were aware of this example
of research curtailment and in the financial and policy implications.

Further details of the relevant topic are available here: 

http://guidance.nice.org.uk/PHG/Wave20/55]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>As former Chair of a NICE research project looking at Spatial Planning and Health prematurely ended by the Government (Department of Health in this case), I would be interested whether you were aware of this example<br />
of research curtailment and in the financial and policy implications.</p>
<p>Further details of the relevant topic are available here: </p>
<p><a href="http://guidance.nice.org.uk/PHG/Wave20/55" rel="nofollow">http://guidance.nice.org.uk/PHG/Wave20/55</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Details revealed: UK government social research and statistics cuts by radstatswebeditor</title>
		<link>http://www.radstats.org.uk/details-revealed-uk-government-social-research-and-statistics-cuts/#comment-7</link>
		<dc:creator>radstatswebeditor</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 26 Feb 2011 10:41:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://radstats.wordpress.com/?p=159#comment-7</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Readers may be interested to know that this story features on today&#039;s (26/2/11) Guardian (p. 11), http://goo.gl/cx3TN
Millions meant for research projects withdrawn
Projects cut short after government withdraws money earmarked for education and employment evaluation
by Mary O&#039;Hara and Jessica Shepherd]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Readers may be interested to know that this story features on today&#8217;s (26/2/11) Guardian (p. 11), <a href="http://goo.gl/cx3TN" rel="nofollow">http://goo.gl/cx3TN</a><br />
Millions meant for research projects withdrawn<br />
Projects cut short after government withdraws money earmarked for education and employment evaluation<br />
by Mary O&#8217;Hara and Jessica Shepherd</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Editorial: ‘The cuts’ (Radical Statistics issue 103) by Tweets that mention Editorial: ‘The cuts’ (Radical Statistics issue 103) &#124; -- Topsy.com</title>
		<link>http://www.radstats.org.uk/editorial-the-cuts-radical-statistics-issue-103/#comment-6</link>
		<dc:creator>Tweets that mention Editorial: ‘The cuts’ (Radical Statistics issue 103) &#124; -- Topsy.com</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 07 Feb 2011 17:56:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://radstats.wordpress.com/?p=142#comment-6</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Robin Rice and radicalstats, Russ Noble. Russ Noble said: Editorial: &#039;The cuts&#039; (Radical Statistics issue 103) &#124; http://bit.ly/h9PIty [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Robin Rice and radicalstats, Russ Noble. Russ Noble said: Editorial: &#039;The cuts&#039; (Radical Statistics issue 103) | <a href="http://bit.ly/h9PIty" rel="nofollow">http://bit.ly/h9PIty</a> [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Break-up of NHS to hurt poorest households by radstatswebeditor</title>
		<link>http://www.radstats.org.uk/137/#comment-5</link>
		<dc:creator>radstatswebeditor</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 06 Feb 2011 19:39:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://radstats.wordpress.com/?p=137#comment-5</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Following the editorial in the Lancet arguing that the proposed changes to the NHS would result in its demise as a national service, the British Medical Journal (BMJ) has published an editorial (see extract below) arguing that the proposed changes are &#039;mad&#039; and &#039;deluded&#039;.

Dr Lansley’s Monster
BMJ Editorial 21 January 2011
http://www.bmj.com/content/342/bmj.d408.full

What do you call a government that embarks on the biggest upheaval of the NHS in its 63 year history, at breakneck speed, while simultaneously trying to make unprecedented financial savings? The politically correct answer has got to be: mad.

The scale of ambition should ring alarm bells. Sir David Nicholson, the NHS chief executive, has described the proposals as the biggest change management programme in the world?the only one so large “that you can actually see it from space.” (More ominously, he added that one of the lessons of change management is that “most big change management systems fail.”) Of the annual 4% efficiency savings expected of the NHS over the next four years, the Commons health select committee said, “The scale of this is without precedent in NHS history; and there is no known example of
such a feat being achieved by any other healthcare system in the world.”

To pull off either of these challenges would therefore be breathtaking; to believe that you could manage both of them at once is deluded...

Informed opinion about GP commissioning, past and present, has been almost universally negative. The previous government’s primary care tsar branded
practice based commissioning “a corpse not for resuscitation.”....

The health secretary has made much of these changes being evolutionary rather than revolutionary. People “woefully overestimate the scale of the change,” he said. After all, practice based commissioning, choice of provider, an NHS price list, and foundation trusts already exist. True, but a week later came the revelation that hospitals would be allowed to undercut the NHS tariff to increase their business. Health economists queued up to say what a terrible idea this was, citing evidence that it would lead to a race to the bottom on price, which would threaten quality. Taken with the opening up of NHS contracts to European competition law, it was the last piece of evidence needed to convince critics that the government was unleashing a storm of creative destruction onto the NHS, with the imperative: compete or die.

Whatever the eventual outcome, such radical reorganisations adversely affect service performance. As Kieran Walshe wrote, they are “a huge distraction from the real mission of the NHS to deliver and improve the quality of healthcare.”

Dave Gordon
Townsend Centre for International Poverty Research
University of Bristol]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Following the editorial in the Lancet arguing that the proposed changes to the NHS would result in its demise as a national service, the British Medical Journal (BMJ) has published an editorial (see extract below) arguing that the proposed changes are &#8216;mad&#8217; and &#8216;deluded&#8217;.</p>
<p>Dr Lansley’s Monster<br />
BMJ Editorial 21 January 2011<br />
<a href="http://www.bmj.com/content/342/bmj.d408.full" rel="nofollow">http://www.bmj.com/content/342/bmj.d408.full</a></p>
<p>What do you call a government that embarks on the biggest upheaval of the NHS in its 63 year history, at breakneck speed, while simultaneously trying to make unprecedented financial savings? The politically correct answer has got to be: mad.</p>
<p>The scale of ambition should ring alarm bells. Sir David Nicholson, the NHS chief executive, has described the proposals as the biggest change management programme in the world?the only one so large “that you can actually see it from space.” (More ominously, he added that one of the lessons of change management is that “most big change management systems fail.”) Of the annual 4% efficiency savings expected of the NHS over the next four years, the Commons health select committee said, “The scale of this is without precedent in NHS history; and there is no known example of<br />
such a feat being achieved by any other healthcare system in the world.”</p>
<p>To pull off either of these challenges would therefore be breathtaking; to believe that you could manage both of them at once is deluded&#8230;</p>
<p>Informed opinion about GP commissioning, past and present, has been almost universally negative. The previous government’s primary care tsar branded<br />
practice based commissioning “a corpse not for resuscitation.”&#8230;.</p>
<p>The health secretary has made much of these changes being evolutionary rather than revolutionary. People “woefully overestimate the scale of the change,” he said. After all, practice based commissioning, choice of provider, an NHS price list, and foundation trusts already exist. True, but a week later came the revelation that hospitals would be allowed to undercut the NHS tariff to increase their business. Health economists queued up to say what a terrible idea this was, citing evidence that it would lead to a race to the bottom on price, which would threaten quality. Taken with the opening up of NHS contracts to European competition law, it was the last piece of evidence needed to convince critics that the government was unleashing a storm of creative destruction onto the NHS, with the imperative: compete or die.</p>
<p>Whatever the eventual outcome, such radical reorganisations adversely affect service performance. As Kieran Walshe wrote, they are “a huge distraction from the real mission of the NHS to deliver and improve the quality of healthcare.”</p>
<p>Dave Gordon<br />
Townsend Centre for International Poverty Research<br />
University of Bristol</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
