We're delighted to be speaking at a Parliamentary Event on Mon 16 Nov organised by @premnsikka Come along to learn about how private equity investors are now firmly embedded in the NHS and social care and what this means for the public interest. tickettailor.com/events/prem…

“The permanent secretary at the department which has responsibility for regulating private ADHD providers appears to have a conflict of interest in this area and so may struggle to remain impartial when it comes to implementing the recommendations made by Prof Fonagy.” theguardian.com/politics/202…

The media appear to be incorrectly reporting the proposed ban on private companies advertising ADHD diagnosis. This isn't what Fonaghy says - the proposed ban is on private companies advertising NHS funded ADHD services. There is no proposed ban on them advertising for private services.

The points we made in Jan this year that the system is being driven by supplier induced demand without any oversight by commissioners and without proper regulation are also backed by the landmark review. chpi.org.uk/reports/how-the-…

Andy Burnham is right to say we already have a death tax/dementia tax to fund social care. As our Director David Rowland points out it affects 220 thousand people a year and is hideously unfair. blogs.lse.ac.uk/politicsandp…

Our Director David Rowland will be discussing why Conflicted Interests in Healthcare are such a big issue at this fantastic online event organised by The Centre for Evidence and Values in Healthcare - book your place here👇medicine.st-andrews.ac.uk/ce… @mgtmccartney

Want to understand more about why NHS expenditure on private companies providing ADHD services is spiralling read our blog from January @LSEpoliticsblog blogs.lse.ac.uk/politicsandp…

We said exactly this back in January 👇 chpi.org.uk/reports/how-the-…

Around 220,000 households are paying for social care, in most cases out of the inheritance that they would otherwise leave to their family. Scaremongering about death taxes ignores the hideously unfair one that already exists blogs.lse.ac.uk/politicsandp…

£2 billion of taxpayer funds went to firms linked to the top official of the NHS who is also accountable to Parliament for ensuring that over £200 billion of public money is spent appropriately. Has there been a bigger Conflict of Interest issue in the NHS? as.ft.com/r/d8b653ca-314d-43…

Transparency about any possible financial links between public officials and private companies is vital to protect the public interest. Yet the £2 billion of taxpayer spend on companies which have been advised by the top NHS civil servant and spouse is completely hidden from view.

The Daily Telegraph and a Labour PM in agreement about the unacceptability of profiteering from adult social care? Here's our research showing just how much leaks out chpi.org.uk/reports/plugging…

And we've also been putting forward solutions to stop profits leaking out of social care to private investors - again in a BBC interview 7 years ago.

Fascinating to see the debate on social care cover the issue of profiteering. Finally. Our director gave this interview to the BBC 7 years ago. £hundreds of millions leak out of the system each year in profits which should go to the frontline.

Concerns about conflicts of interest at the top of the civil service are real and significant. This issue shows that the current rules are clearly inadequate in protecting the public interest. They should be urgently overhauled to restore trust and to prevent corporate influence from tainting the impartiality of the civil service"

“The fact that the top civil servant at the DHSC was advising one of the parties to the contract at the time it was arranged raises questions about impartiality, especially given that officials are said to be considering operating a break clause in the contract,”

"It is arguably highly advantageous for any private equity fund which generates most of its revenue from the NHS and taxpayer-funded social care to have connections at the very top of the DHSC" as.ft.com/r/11efcabc-cb2a-4d…

The permanent secretary of the Department of Health and her husband have links with a private equity company which owns a range of outsourced NHS services providers including care for kids, ADHD diagnosis, cataract surgery. Do the rules allow this? Were Ministers told?