On Tuesday 20 November 2001 07:14, you wrote:

On Tue, 20 Nov 2001, Mark Evans wrote:

...

...

As such, the principle of solidarity (i.e. that fact that the services available to a person under the NHS bear no relationship to the amount (if any) contributed by that person to the NHS by way of taxes or National Insurance contributions) and the fact that the body in question fulfils a purely social function is central to the question as to whether or not that body is an undertaking. As such, whether this might involve the purchase of, say, a renal dialysis machine or the necessary computer software services required for the general purpose of helping to run the NHS is irrelevant if the purpose in both cases is to facilitate the overall objective of the NHS - the provision of free healthcare services to society as a whole."

But would this principle of "solidarity" not mean that there is a duty on the NHS to ensure that it spends money carefully. So as to maximise heathcare provision.

I think that this is more relevant to the National Audit Office than the OFT. Investigating value for money is definitely outside the OFT's remit, whereas it is reasonable to expect them to investigate possible anti-competitive deals.

Didn't someone contact the NAO on the value for money issue? What was the result?

I did and I gat a reply recently which basically said they though the procedures followed were OK but then seemed to ignore their own guidance! I sent a reply and copied the lot to the Register. If anyone wants a copy I can post it here or send it by E-mail. I'm not particularly surprised. This is a long war of attrition so we need to keep plugging away and not be satisfied with answers that don't stand up to teast against their own criteria. -- IanL Open Source - save money - employ more teachers Use Star Office the free replacement for Microsoft Office -------------------------------------------------------