has stated“If the BMA won’t accept a fair and reasonable offer then, yes, it is legitimate and sensible for the Secretary of State to consider imposition.”
So who's to decide what constitutes a "fair and reasonable offer"? In his mind I think that that decision would fall to people like him, and Jeremy Hunt.
DZ worked in the NHS back in the days when there were no safeguards for doctors when it came to working hours and remembers working work patterns which were grossly exploitative and dangerous. It has taken us many years to rectify that situation to a point when safeguards do now exist, though various governments resisted strongly along the way. Remember, when the working hours directive first became law doctors had special treatment. It didn't apply to them.
So having won these safeguards, weak as they are, against exploitation and servitude, Hunt now wants to abolish them. Now why would anyone want to do that do you suppose?
So what is Hopson's experience working in the NHS. Well prior to his present position he was a glorified tax collector. And before that he worked for independent television. So he's obviosly well qualified for his present job, pontificating about how to run the NHS, and riding roughshod over the staff.
I don't know how much he is paid for his invaluable contribution, but judging from the chins cascading over his oversized shirt collar I imagine it's substantial. And I don't suppose he works Saturdays either.
This ignorant fat lardbucket has no insight at all into the determination of, not just the medical profession, but all the others working in the NHS who stand to get screwed if the doctors, the first domino, fall.
Ok then Hopson, you utter prick, and Hunt you mendacious bell end. Impose a contract. And we'll see what happens shall we?