So, the evil Tory party has been ‘exposed’ as not supporting the NHS.
Sixty per cent of Tory MPs have admitted in a survey that we should support giving tax relief to those who buy private health insurance, which has been extrapolated by those who commissioned the study as leaving their policy statement of supporting the NHS as being “in tatters”.
On the other hand, only 1% of New Labour MPs were allowed by Gordon and Peter to agree, the other 99% suggesting that it was fine to tax the rich to the hilt, so long as their own healthcare insurance wasn’t affected. And a slightly fuzzy number of Lib Dems thought it might or might not be a good idea. Possibly.
Forget the argument in the US that the NHS is an evil government behemoth that has “death lists”, and must be resisted at all costs to allow the free market economy to flourish unchecked in healthcare. How have we let ourselves get to the polar situation that any support for the private sector is somehow an assault on the concept of universal healthcare, free at the point of access?
When you fly abroad, you can fly in economy. You, and your luggage, still usually get there, they show you a film, feed you and give you a seat. The fact that you can choose to fly in club, with a range of movies, a more comfy seat and nicer food - and pay more for the privilege - does not seem to be an assault on our right to go on holiday.
Interestingly, if you have a crap pilot, your chance of having a bad landing or crash is as likely in first class as in cattle class - a good analogy to the surgeons who maintain both a good NHS and private surgical practice.
So, if someone wants to pay extra to ensure that they see a consultant, have a nicer waiting room, a private room with a TV and a bowl of fruit, should they not be allowed to do so? Given that they actually take some of the pressure off the NHS system, by removing themselves from NHS clinics and waiting lists for investigation or treatment, should they not receive some recognition for that from the Inland Revenue to say: “Yes, we know that you are taking some financial responsibility for your own healthcare”?
In other countries, this is a no-brainer. In Australia, if you have a condition requiring emergency treatment, you generally get treated quickly and efficiently. If you have an elective condition, you wait…often years. If people complain about this, they get short shrift. “If you want quick elective treatment, get health insurance”. No-one seems to complain - they know the score.
Unfortunately, in the UK, the government has promised the public a universal healthcare system, with waiting times that challenge the private sector, and salubrious surroundings to boot. It costs a fortune and is undeliverable. Let’s stop pussy-footing around this and tell the truth.
No matter how socialist your ideals, let’s admit that a fully functional modern health care network cannot be delivered just through public funding, and let’s allow the two systems to symbiotically develop, while educating the public of the need to take a bit more physical and financial interest in their own healthcare.
Tags: Funding, US healthcare
Several years ago, I suggested a ‘NHS Plus’ service that would provide what you describe. I was roundly vilified as being Right of Gengis Khan. I am glad you’ve outed this idea, which is so obvious.
(Incidentally, I also proposed rich people sponsoring unemployed people (like child sponsorship in 3rd world countries). Now, I see there is a successful TV programme doing just that!)
Maybe its time has come?
I can’t help but think that the public service will suffer if more and more patients take out insurance, and we all start doing more and more private work for insurance companies. The arguement for tax relief also seems sensible on the surface, but then more tax relief = less tax income = less money for the Nash again…
Any step away from genuine universalism will lead to greater inequalities in healthcare.
Costs of running the NHS are only going in one direction and the public aren’t prepared to pay anymore tax.
So, we’re either going to have to reduce the range/extent of services offered or come up with another way of funding them.
An insurance model for a premium service would certainly be a plausible way of doing it. This debate does need to happen, sooner rather than later.
It’s already starting to happen by the looks of it.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2009/aug/27/tory-borough-barnet-budget-airline