It was all a waste of money
Via Tim we get the winner of “Bleedin’ obvious statement of the Year” courtesy of Patricia Hewitt:
Patricia Hewitt, the Health Secretary, admitted yesterday that the extra billions of pounds invested in the NHS have failed to make much difference to patients.
Honesty must be so liberating for a New Labour politician because by this time she was on a roll:
“We asked the public to pay higher contributions to fund record investment in the NHS and we have to convince them that those resources are being used in the most effective way possible.”
Well, you are not doing a very good job so far love.
She was getting giddy by this point:
“For all the extra money, all the extra staff and extra patients treated, NHS productivity has remained almost unmoved.
“Statisticians argue about how best to measure it. If you just count the number of patients treated, you conclude the service has become a bit less efficient.
“If you take account of better quality care and the additional lives saved, which is what really matters, then the NHS has become a bit more efficient.
There you have it. It matters not how many people are treated, but how well those who get to the front of the waiting list are treated. Words from her own mouth.
So for an extra £48 billion pounds a year coming from our pockets, the NHS is either a bit less or a bit more efficient… depending on your point of view.
Spending on health services in England has risen from £33 billion in 1996-97 when Labour came to power to £81 billion this financial year. However with an overall budget deficit of £500 million, many local primary care trusts are trying to balance their books by cutting jobs, restricting services and closing wards.
Whilst Patty’s honesty is no doubt refreshing, it comes about 9 years too late. The money has gone.
Miss Hewitt said there were four key elements to the Government’s reform programme: more choice and a stronger voice for patients; a range and choice of health care providers; money following the patient; and a regulatory system to guarantee standards.
None of which even attempts to answer the £41 billion question: “Where the fuck did all that money go?”
Let’s look at her four key elements:
1. More choice and a stronger voice for patients
I just want treated. Efficiently and if possible, locally. Choice is a red herring designed to give the voter the illusion that they have some kind of say in the running of the NHS.
2. A range and choice of health care providers>
How is this different from point 1?
3. Money following the patient
Creating an infinite mountain of very costly bureaucracy. Why should the patient even give a shit about this? We just want treated!
4. A regulatory system to guarantee standards
Oh goody, even more bureaucracy. Wonderful.
Alex Nunns, of Keep Our NHS Public said: “If people have to travel twice as far to go to an A&E or to have a baby, most of them will conclude that the health service has got worse.”
