Safety 2019 - Policy statement - Safe staffing in hospitalsOur position on safe staffing in hospitals, following the Francis Inquiry and others2019 - Consultation response - Response to NHS Improvement's consultation on developing a patient safety strategy for the NHSWe welcome many of NHS Improvement's proposals, and recommend that a stronger focus on patient input, transparency and leadership be added.2018 - Consultation response - Response to the Patient Safety Learning green paper 'A Patient-Safe Future'Our reflections on the analysis of patient safety issues put forward by the charity Patient Safety Learning.2018 - Evidence submission to PHSO's review of clinical adviceOur evidence to PHSO about patients' experiences of its use of clinical advice. 2018 - Evidence submission to the Kark Review of the Fit and Proper Persons RequirementOur evidence to the review of the Fit and Proper Persons Requirement for senior leaders in the NHS.2018 - Evidence submission to the Marx / Hamilton review of gross negligence manslaughter and culpable homicideOur evidence to the review of the law around manslaughter as it relates to medical errors. 2018 - Consultation response - Submission to joint committee on Draft Health Service Safety Investigations Body BillOur evidence to the parliamentary committee undertaking pre-legislative scrutiny of the Bill to create HSSIB as an independent body.2018 - Policy statement - PHSOA summary statement of the Patients Association's position on the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman. 2017 – Consultation response – PHSO draft strategic planThe Patients Association has been critical of the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman for the quality of its work for patients. This response summarises our past criticisms, and welcomes PHSO's proposals for transforming itself over the coming years. 2017 – Consultation response - Fixed recoverable costs for ‘lower value’ clinical negligence casesThe Government has proposed to restrict the value of recoverable costs available to patients who have been the victim of clinical negligence, and awarded 'lower value' damages. Our response opposes the proposals, argues that there is no reason why 'lower value' cases must inevitably be simpler and less expensive to litigate, and warns of a risk of patients being excluded from justice.