Tag: Nye Bevin
NHS 60: How do we improve our health service?
jkitleft Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 12:41:45 PM GMT 
Facebook
The health service, for all its faults, is much better than 11 years ago.
Waiting lists are down from an average of 18 months, to 4-6 weeks. The infrustructure of the hospital buildings, and clinics have dramatically improved in some areas. Cancer and heart deaths are down. Funding has made a real difference, and the NHS is undoubtedly better with 78,000 more nurses and 20,000 more doctors.
There have been some great reforms, some I'm not supportive of. I support the latest polyclinic plan, which can make a real difference in poorer areas. I don't mind if the state picks up the tab for private operations, as long as my gran gets the same treatment as a duchess. However, foundation hospitals may have led to middle-class areas creaming off funding.
Another greatreform of this government, is that they didn't divert funding to poorer peforming hospitals. This has meant that poorer wings and hospitals have to close. However bad in the short term, it is the long term right decision.
The government announced that quality, and not money or quantity would define funding yesterday. The particular problem with the cleaning industry, is that its marketisation has led to funding being directed on the issue of cost, rather than quality.
This is the greatness of the constitution. Rather than inciting people to fall for wonder drugs, it ends the postcode lottery by allowing people to demand any drug that NICE recommends. It needs more than £100 mn to ease the costs, but its a start.
The issue of choice doesn't weaken the roots of the NHS in the latest reforms. Everyone now has a legal right to choose their GP and hospital.
For those who say we need to change our funding structure, it is important to know that countries like France and the US are moving towards our funding structures.
It is more cost effective, as the Tories found when they wanted to abolish the NHS in the '50's, as public and private costs combined took up less of GDP. Ironically, the same things were said then: an ageing population, galloping technological advance and rising public expectations make the NHS unsustainable.
The NHS is in good health. 10 years ago, it needed serious operating on. But there are no more defecits, no more annual crises, and no more winter ward closures. Avoidable death rates show a 23% improvement-in the years of 1998-2003, before the big Labour spend.
Waiting lists are down from an average of 18 months, to 4-6 weeks. The infrustructure of the hospital buildings, and clinics have dramatically improved in some areas. Cancer and heart deaths are down. Funding has made a real difference, and the NHS is undoubtedly better with 78,000 more nurses and 20,000 more doctors.
There have been some great reforms, some I'm not supportive of. I support the latest polyclinic plan, which can make a real difference in poorer areas. I don't mind if the state picks up the tab for private operations, as long as my gran gets the same treatment as a duchess. However, foundation hospitals may have led to middle-class areas creaming off funding.
Another greatreform of this government, is that they didn't divert funding to poorer peforming hospitals. This has meant that poorer wings and hospitals have to close. However bad in the short term, it is the long term right decision.
The government announced that quality, and not money or quantity would define funding yesterday. The particular problem with the cleaning industry, is that its marketisation has led to funding being directed on the issue of cost, rather than quality.
This is the greatness of the constitution. Rather than inciting people to fall for wonder drugs, it ends the postcode lottery by allowing people to demand any drug that NICE recommends. It needs more than £100 mn to ease the costs, but its a start.
The issue of choice doesn't weaken the roots of the NHS in the latest reforms. Everyone now has a legal right to choose their GP and hospital.
For those who say we need to change our funding structure, it is important to know that countries like France and the US are moving towards our funding structures.
It is more cost effective, as the Tories found when they wanted to abolish the NHS in the '50's, as public and private costs combined took up less of GDP. Ironically, the same things were said then: an ageing population, galloping technological advance and rising public expectations make the NHS unsustainable.
The NHS is in good health. 10 years ago, it needed serious operating on. But there are no more defecits, no more annual crises, and no more winter ward closures. Avoidable death rates show a 23% improvement-in the years of 1998-2003, before the big Labour spend.
