It comes as no surprise that, in the run up to the next General Election, the issue of healthcare fu...
It comes as no surprise that, in the run up to the next General Election, the issue of healthcare funding has once again become something of a political football.
First, the Tories announce that a Conservative Government would cut taxes on group private medical insurance schemes for both employers and scheme members, to increase uptake and in turn, reduce the burden on the NHS.
Labour's response is to accuse the Tories of abandoning the basic concept of the NHS that care should be based on clinical need rather than ability to pay. This outright dismissal of the Conservative's proposals comes in spite of the fact that Tony Blair has stated 'partnership' is one of the five areas to be explored to meet the ambitious targets set out in Labour's NHS Plan.
It later transpires in a Sunday paper that a top adviser to the Shadow Health Secretary has suggested the Tories should shake up the NHS to such an extent that anyone earning over £35,000 a year should be banned from using it. This further fuels Labour's accusations that the Tories are planning to privatise the health service and create a two-tier system.
While it would betray tradition if politics did not involve an element of opposition for opposition's sake, in this case it is destructive. The bickering is causing both parties to fail to see the wood for the trees. This is that, with proper debate and discussion, a compromise can be achieved between these seemingly distant poles of thought, and that the goal improved provision of the nation's healthcare is a common one.
It is a question of balance. The debate should not centre around whether the NHS should be based on need versus ability to pay. It should be on how both elements can be combined to produce the best results in other words, a true partnership between the public and private sectors bringing benefits for each. This does not mean the end of a universal health service, nor does it mean a two-tier system where the wealthiest can 'opt out' and pay for quicker and superior private treatment. It means incentivising people to make some provision towards their own healthcare, so that the NHS has more resources to provide a better core service for everyone. It also means working closely with the insurance industry to design products which appeal and are affordable to the widest possible range of people. This may even mean adopting something along the lines of the stakeholder pensions model, with a basic State-endorsed insurance product which is provided and managed by the private sector.
But equally important, is for politicians to ditch the short-termism in favour of a long-term cross-party approach, so the nation's healthcare is not dragged into the political battlefield each time there is an election and to ensure a degree of consistency no matter which party ends up in power.
Catherine Tennant
Editor-in-chief
