The NHS reforms are the weak link in Cameron’s chain…

David Cameron is staking alot on his package of public service reforms. This is especially true in the case of the NHS which was one issue Cameron focused on as he tried to convince a weary electorate that the Conservatives were properly ‘detoxified’ and therefore fit to govern (when the environment had fallen out of fashion). One thing you can say positively about Cameron is that he is reasonably good at polishing his performances. However, today his sure-footedness seemed to desert him as first he launched an ill-tempered broadside against critics of reform – urging them to ‘grow-up’.  He then left himself wide open to an easy hit from Labour:

In an interview, Mr Cameron said that patients should not have to settle for “second rate” healthcare. He corrected himself, fearing that health professionals would take a very dim view of his assessment.

Labour seized on the slip with John Healey, the shadow health secretary, saying that improvements in the NHS were clear for everyone to see.

He said: “David Cameron also seems to see the NHS as second rate when everybody else has seen big improvements by Labour in recent years and public satisfaction is now at an all time high. This is an insult to millions of NHS staff.

Cameron’s clumsiness tends to suggest he is all too painfully aware of what is it at stake and is somewhat nervous. Health is one of those areas where people neither trust nor particularly want the market. Sick people don’t want ‘choice’; they want to be made better and that’s pretty much where their interest ends as long as some basic standard is met. Most people don’t have the resources of the likes of Cameron and he patently doesn’t understand the NHS and what makes it popular.

In short, its one of those issues where people are far more predisposed, by natural inclination, to support left-wing sentiments against the right. People are much more naturally inured to the rhetorical charms of concepts like ‘choice’ and the usual verbal hocus-pocus that accompanies marketisation. This makes it a tricky hand to play for Cameron and also one where we can break him.  Of course, as is becoming usual Labour is making its stand on a bold platform of scoring pithy points from cheap shots. So, we get cat-calling about ‘insults’ to create the illusion of difference where none really exists, in substance.

‘Bureaucracy’ is constantly rounded on as the bane of the NHS. However, the the problems caused by the mixed-market which sees inordinate amounts of money spent on drugs on equipment which, were these companies to be nationalised, would be provided free of charge. So, a credible start to reforming and ‘modernising’ health care provision, reducing NHS costs,  would be the nationalisation of the entire healthcare sector. Of course, this should be done under the auspices of the democratic control of workers within the various companies (with provision  in the case of hospitals for input from local communities). Democracy will thus shrink the bureaucracy without damaging the provision of healthcare for those who depend on the service it provides. I guess though this is not ‘on the table’. In the recent flu epidemic we have already seen the price people pay for  the governments light touch ‘big society’ sell-off. People paid for its negligence with their lives. Sadly, I don’t think they will be the last….



Tags: , ,

About darrellgoodliffe


2 responses to “The NHS reforms are the weak link in Cameron’s chain…”

  1. Robert says :

    Again your wrong, we had two brilliant years in the NHS in which a large sum of money was given, nurses pays and doctor pay went up which it needed too, but as we know managers pay went through the roof.

    Then hospitals went through a period in which they hoped labour would put billions more into the kitty, but of course they did not and the funding for the NHS with all the wage increases caused serious problems.

    NHS dentist were another major problem;em for labour, the new medical computer system just ate money and in the end failed.

    Saying labour saved the NHS or made it better, in my hospital under Labour senior nurses were being made redundant to lower the cost.

    I mean for god sake the Hospital even employed an art critic to buy art for the hospital walls , he was paid £125,000 and was given a million to spend on art, then after he left the art he bought was sold and the new chap was told to use local artist to show with the price visible so you could buy it.

    The top man in my NHS wages went from £135,000 to £285,000 and a massive increase with his pension.

    To wards the end of labours life all of the hospital were in financial difficulty.

    So sorry, and before you have a go at me, today on the local News my NHS has reported a deficit of six million, it also stated it is now bed blocked again saying it’s even worse then Thatchers period, reason the Labour council has just closed three nursing home and the people from these homes are now bed blocking the hospital.

    Yes labour did give a one off massive increase into the NHS which would have been much better targeted.


  2. darrellgoodliffe says :


    Bit of a baffling reply but I will try and address your points.

    1) Are you asserting that it would not in fact free up alot of resources for the NHS were it to be the case that it no longer had to pay for drugs and equipment?

    2) Yes, executive pay is a problem and bureaucracy is a problem – something I incidentally never deny – but my advice here would *be careful*. Attacks on these things by politicians are usually by-words for veiled attacks on wages lower down the pecking order and/or removal of frontline services. Basically, they ignore the salient point that a certain amount of bureaucracy will exist in a nationalised service, just indeed as it exists in private companies.

    This is why I propose a democratic solution. The way to solve these problems is not through privatisation which will only make them worse and remove healthcare protection from those who are most vulnerable but through democratic socialism; that is democratically owned, managed and provided healthcare.

    3) I never mount a defence of Labour on this do I? Where in the post did I make an issue of Labour’s record on this issue? Indeed, I was quite scathing and feel, I suspect a bit like yourself, that they would proceed along similar lines, given the chance.

    Hope that addresses your points…


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: