How many ‘unfortunate’ incidents must we have?

Published: 21 May 2010

• WHENEVER something goes wrong at Camden and Islington NHS Foundation Trust it is quick to distance itself from any responsibility (The ‘gunman’ who slipped safety check, May 14). It tried to do the same thing in the case of Anthony Hardy.

What they cannot deny is that the trust provides Islington Borough User Group (iBUG) with offices at the Highgate Mental Health Centre and that Richard Hiorns worked out of there as an assistant director of that organisation with almost unlimited access to the wards there.  

If it knew about his criminal past – and it should have since it claims to carry out Criminal Records Bureau (CRB) checks – then it was reckless; if it didn’t know then it was negligent. In either case the trust is responsible and has not made the safety of patients and staff the principal consideration it claims to.

If further checks and balances are not put in place then it is all too possible there may be yet another “unfortunate” incident.

David Brown
Haverstock Hill, NW3

• RICHARD Hiorns was being paid substantial sums for attending council and NHS Islington committee meetings. Surely, it cannot be a good idea to offer people with known drug or alcohol problems cash payments. It just puts temptation in their way and is likely to be detrimental to their recovery rather than advance it.  

There is also a serious question about how these cash payments should affect the benefit payments which people with these problems often claim. In general, it would seem that they often go undeclared.

NHS Islington and Islington Council fund iBUG to a level of about £30,000 per year and it seems from the annual accounts that about £10,000 of that is used to make payments to members.  

iBUG members are quite open about the fact they receive cash payments and that there is no pressure on them to declare them. Similar payments are made by Camden and Islington NHS Foundation Trust.  

It seems seriously irresponsible for the authorities to be paying out money in this way and in doing so possibly causing service users receiving payments to break the law and put themselves in danger of forfeiting their benefit payments and being prosecuted.

The Richard Hiorns affair may give rise to other questions about payments that urgently need to be answered.

J Fox
Corsica Street, N5