There is no point investing money in a healthcare system that does not deliver, says Stephen Walker
There has been much talk in the press regarding the future of the NHS, following the interim Wanless report. The Government's solution is to throw more money at the problem by raising taxes, even though families already pay around £207 a month in tax to fund the NHS ' more than most families pay for PMI.
The reported deal between the NHS and BUPA involving BUPA's Redwood hospital in Surrey is a red herring. The hospital, built as a private wing beside an NHS hospital, has 36 beds, purportedly operating at about half capacity. BUPA is not, at present, negotiating with the Government over other such arrangements. But at least it is another step in the dialogue between the public and private sectors to solve the UK's healthcare problem and offer some hope for the future.
Patients have also been given the opportunity to travel overseas for treatment. But do people want to travel to France or Germany for an operation, and what happens if complications develop, or if they need follow-up treatment on their return to the UK? The concept of cheaper and quicker treatment overseas may appear good in theory, but has many drawbacks in practice.
Both the BUPA initiative and the concept of treatment abroad are about propping up a failed system. Where is the sense in throwing good money after bad by trying to resuscitate a system that no longer delivers? The NHS has gone past the tipping point and is now, effectively in freefall. It takes a huge amount of effort to make a super-tanker change direction and this is the task facing the Government. It will take a lot more than the money it is intending to spend on its rescue operation.
The NHS is a political ideal that does not work. 'NHS-free healthcare for all' has about as much credence as 'National Lottery ' wealth for all'. We should look at systems that do work, such as those employed in Germany, France and Australia. These systems embrace the insurance concept, but Gordon Brown has declared insurance, whether social or private, is off the agenda.
The Australian system offers a logical solution ' people can opt out of the state system by taking out a PMI policy and benefit from tax relief on their premiums. AXA launched an age-at-entry policy and people queued to join up.
But the medical insurance industry has to be able to offer an acceptable alternative to the NHS. Current PMI policies complement the NHS, they do not provide an alternative. Roy Lilley, an independent health policy analyst and a former NHS Trust chairman has been quoted as saying: 'There is (currently) no private sector in this country. There are a number of insurance companies and charities that provide an infrastructure for NHS doctors to moonlight.'
We need PMI policies that cover all eventualities, including pre-existing and chronic conditions, and proper segregation between the public and private sectors, with doctors contracted to one or the other.
The Government should be considering all options and talking to all sectors of the healthcare industry in order to create an efficient health service.
