logo
Britain must stop subsidising pensioners to save the NHS

Britain must stop subsidising pensioners to save the NHS

Telegraph3 days ago
The Government recently produced a paper on the NHS entitled 'Fit for the Future – The 10 Year Health Plan for England'. It included many radical ideas and didn't pull its punches in regard to the need for reform. It said: 'The choice is stark: reform or die'. And, if nothing is done, it said, the NHS could become 'a poor service for poor people'.
Despite its radical tone and many good ideas, this report did not go far enough. In particular, it accepted the continuation of the current system of funding whereby just about the whole cost of the Service is borne by the taxpayer.
In a report published last week by Policy Exchange entitled 'The NHS – a Suitable Case for Treatment?', I and two co-authors went much further and called for an end to the system of predominantly taxpayer funding which has been the model since the NHS was founded in 1948.
In the mid-1950s the government spent about 3pc of its GDP on healthcare. Today the figure is 9pc (excluding the private sector), amounting to almost a fifth of all government spending. If nothing is done, by 2070 we could end up spending more than a fifth of our GDP on the NHS.
This is unacceptable. If we allowed this to happen, other sorts of public spending would have to be squeezed and/or taxes would have to be raised to eye-watering levels. This would have a devastating effect on incentives and therefore a materially depressing effect on the economy.
The funding system is the first of the NHS's major problems. The second is inadequate quality. Many British people think that the NHS delivers a first-class service. Yet, it is clear that the NHS offers neither the best nor the worst healthcare in the world. Admittedly, at its best, it is superb, but the standard is hit and miss, and at its worst, it is pretty bad.
Among a group of countries of comparable economic development (Australia, France, Germany, the Netherlands, Singapore, Switzerland and the US), on both life expectancy and healthy life expectancy the UK comes in second to last. Only the US scores worse.
On preventable and treatable mortality, the UK again comes in second to last, ahead of only the US. On the proportion of patients waiting over a year to see a specialist, the UK is the highest in the group. We also perform badly on the ease of securing an appointment with a GP and access to GPs out of hours.
What is to be done? Whenever someone criticises the NHS and suggests that we need to move to a different model, a chorus of voices loudly proclaims that we must not become like America. Indeed not. The US health system pulls off a remarkable double whammy. Although some of the best healthcare in the world is to be found in the United States, average health outcomes for the population as a whole are simply dire.
Meanwhile, the system is about the most expensive in the world. However bad the NHS may seem, it is infinitely preferable to the American system. Under no circumstances should we consider copying the US.
But we don't have to. There are many countries in the world which operate a different system for funding healthcare and enjoy better average health outcomes than the UK. The essence of their approach is to combine charging and co-payments with a system of social insurance. That is to say, compulsory purchasing of medical insurance, covering everyone in the population, with concessionary rates or even full reimbursement available for poor people. The state remains involved as both a partial funder, co-ordinator and regulator of the system. But governments spend much less on healthcare in these countries than we do, and thereby place a much smaller burden on their taxpayers.
Countries that run such a system include Australia, Canada, France, Germany, the Netherlands, Singapore and Switzerland. The most outstandingly successful of these is Singapore. It spends only about 5pc of its GDP on healthcare and of that, not much more than a half comes from government. Meanwhile, Singapore achieves just about the best health outcomes in our comparator group.
Yet Singapore is a very special case, with a particular political and social model. For an example that would serve the UK well, we should probably look closer to home. The obvious place to look is the Netherlands, not least because it underwent a radical reform of its health system in 2006. It delivers high standards of healthcare yet the government spends only 1pc of GDP on health.
Some people will argue that we already have a system of insurance to pay for healthcare, namely National Insurance. Despite its name, however, this is not really a system of insurance. It is rather another form of tax. The amount of money the state pays for healthcare is not restricted by the amount of National Insurance contributions coming into the Treasury. Moreover, unlike pensions, where eligibility is connected with National Insurance contributions, a person's ability to access the NHS is not circumscribed by their NI contribution record.
Moving from a system of funding through taxation to one based largely on social insurance is going to be a tough ask. It cannot be completed overnight. The place to start a programme to reform the financing of the NHS is with the introduction of a small charge for GP appointments and an end to the automatic entitlement to free prescriptions for pensioners, regardless of their financial circumstances.
Doubtless many people will say that these proposals destroy the essence of the NHS as it was established in 1948. But the provision of healthcare in this country cannot be treated as a sort of museum exhibit. We can adhere to the spirit of the NHS in creating a system that delivers excellent healthcare for all within a funding framework that is right for the 21 st century.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Poll of the day: Do you think resident doctors are fairly paid for the work they do?
Poll of the day: Do you think resident doctors are fairly paid for the work they do?

The Independent

time20 minutes ago

  • The Independent

Poll of the day: Do you think resident doctors are fairly paid for the work they do?

Junior doctors are staging a walkout – but are they right to demand more pay? Talks between the British Medical Association (BMA) and the government have broken down, triggering a five-day strike starting on Friday and the threat of monthly walkouts until a deal is reached. The government has already awarded a 5.4 per cent pay rise this year, bringing salaries for foundation doctors to between £38,831 and £44,439, and up to £73,992 for those in specialist training. But the BMA argues this still falls short of where pay should be, after more than a decade of real-terms decline. It is calling for pay to rise to between £47,308 and £54,274 for foundation doctors, and up to £90,989 at the top end of specialist training – a 29 per cent increase phased in over time. Health Secretary Wes Streeting has called the strike 'completely unjustified' and says the current pay offer is fair. But the BMA insists current salaries don't reflect the demands of the job or the debt many junior doctors carry from medical school. The NHS Confederation warns that each 0.1 per cent pay rise across the service costs an extra £125 million a year, and with 75,000 junior doctors in England, meeting the BMA's request could run into the billions. So, are junior doctors being underpaid – or is their demand simply unaffordable?

Dozens of ready meals pulled from shelves in Ireland after adult dies from listeriosis
Dozens of ready meals pulled from shelves in Ireland after adult dies from listeriosis

The Independent

time20 minutes ago

  • The Independent

Dozens of ready meals pulled from shelves in Ireland after adult dies from listeriosis

An adult has died after contracting the rare bacterial infection listeriosis in the Republic of Ireland, with nine falling ill in total, health authorities have said. A product recall has been issued by the Food Safety Authority of Ireland (FSAI) for dozens of ready meals due to the presence of the bacteria Listeria monocytogenes, which can cause 'severe foodborne disease' according to the World Health Organisation (WHO). A total of 141 different ready meals produced by Ballymaguire Foods have been recalled, including products sold in most major supermarkets across Ireland. "The HSE Health Protection Surveillance Centre has been notified of and is investigating the death of an adult with confirmed listeriosis,' the FSAI told The Independent. It is investigating an 'extensive outbreak' after identifying nine cases. A 'voluntary precautionary food recall of ready-to-heat meals is underway due to a link with the outbreak,' it added. Listeriosis, the infection caused by Listeria monocytogenes, can in rare cases be severe and cause 'serious complications', the FSAI said. Pregnant women, babies, and those with weakened immune systems, including the elderly, are all more vulnerable to serious infections from the bacteria. The incubation time - meaning the time between the infection and the appearance of the first symptoms - averages around three weeks, but can be between three and 70 days, the FSAI said. The WHO describes listeriosis as one of the 'most serious and severe foodborne diseases', adding that it is 'relatively rare' with between 0.1 to 10 cases per million people per year, depending on the country. Despite the small number of cases, the 'high rate of death associated with this infection makes it a significant public health concern', it says. Products from Tesco Finest, The Happy Pear, SuperValu Signature Taste, and Centra Freshly Prepared are all among the products to have been recalled. Ballymaguire Foods said it has initiated a "full precautionary recall of all products produced at one of our facilities following the identification of listeria bacteria as part of a quality control check". The company said such incidents are 'extremely rare' and apologised to all of its customers. "Immediately upon identifying the issue, we informed our retail and food-service customers and engaged with all relevant authorities, including the Food Safety Authority of Ireland, the Health Service Executive, and our regional Environmental Health Officer,' it said. "Through our retail partners, all products are being withdrawn from the shelves, and a full consumer communication process is under way."

DIY health tests relied on by thousands could be delivering false results and putting lives at risk, major study reveals
DIY health tests relied on by thousands could be delivering false results and putting lives at risk, major study reveals

Daily Mail​

time21 minutes ago

  • Daily Mail​

DIY health tests relied on by thousands could be delivering false results and putting lives at risk, major study reveals

Many DIY tests for the likes of high cholesterol, vitamin deficiency, fertility and prostate cancer are not fit for purpose, a study suggests. Researchers examined tests that patients can buy in supermarkets, pharmacies and shops which they then use at home. They found the checks risked giving users the wrong result and could delay diagnosis. Most of them recommended following-up with a doctor regardless of the result, prompting experts to question the point of using them in the first place. Scientists from the University of Birmingham are now calling for much tighter regulation of the sector, adding that the NHS may face additional demand after patients self-test. They said: 'In the absence of guidance from healthcare professionals, individuals might use tests inappropriately or without a clear understanding of the implications of the results. 'False positive test results can lead to unnecessary anxiety, increased healthcare usage, and additional costs, whereas false negative test results may delay appropriate treatment or engagement with screening programmes. 'Test errors can stem from inherent limitations in the accuracy of the test, as well as user-related issues such as sampling errors, incorrect processing, and difficulties in interpreting the results.' However, the team said that in the future home tests could have great potential for patient care. The Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) said it would look at the findings. Self-testing is becoming increasingly popular and the UK market for self-tests is expected to reach £660million by 2030. Overall 30 self-tests costing £1.89 to £39.99 were included in the study, published in the British Medical Journal (BMJ). The tests covered 19 different conditions, including vitamin deficiency, blood sugar levels, cholesterol, thyroid function, prostate health, HIV, menopause and bowel cancer. Researchers said only eight of the 30 tests provided information about who should or should not use the test, while four specified the presence of symptoms. External packaging on fewer than half of the tests (14) included any statement about their accuracy. Meanwhile, 90 per cent of the tests recommended following up with a healthcare professional if results were positive or abnormal, while 47 per cent recommended this if the outcome was negative. Accuracy claims were made for 24 of the tests, including in pamphlets, and most (58 per cent) claimed a performance of at least 98 per cent accuracy, sensitivity or specificity. However, the researchers said evidence supporting accuracy claims was largely unavailable or did not provide sufficient information for people likely to purchase the tests. Professor Jon Deeks, from the University of Birmingham, said: 'A plethora of new health self-tests have emerged in recent years and are available to buy from many high street supermarkets and pharmacies in the UK. 'While these kits have been approved for sale, they are not subject to the same stringent regulations as pharmaceutical products. 'Our recent research raises concerns about the suitability, accuracy and usability of many of the self-testing products available that require users to sample, test and interpret results themselves. 'In some cases, it is unclear how accuracy claims are supported, and there is no requirement of manufacturers to share the evidence behind these claims.' Professor Deeks said the UK is looking at a 'new world' when it comes to self-testing, but there is more work to do to show claims made were robust. He said much of the literature contained with tests was 'not easy to understand', while some of the results could lead to a 'wrong diagnosis'. In one example, he said the self-tests for prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels, a marker of prostate health, were fixed at a certain concentration level. However, he said this depended on how old the patient was, adding 'if you're age 70 you need to have your PSA done at a very different level to when you're 20'. Professor Deeks added: 'Current regulations for the use of self-testing kits in a commercial setting are not adequately protecting consumers.' Dr Clare Davenport, clinical associate professor at the University of Birmingham, said: 'The wide range of off-the-shelf tests now available to the public are not endorsed by the NHS and evidence for their benefit is lacking. 'This is in contrast to well-established self-tests, such as pregnancy tests. 'We are worried that consumers concerned about their health and tempted by the convenience of buying a test over the counter may be harmed if they use these tests in the wrong way.' A spokesman for Suresign, which provides three of the self-tests studied, said: 'We find this blanket condemnation of a small range of home tests available to be unreasonable and unprofessional, since they admit they are content with many of those examined. 'This is not a clinical approach to a highly scientific subject. 'We are content our tests give the public access to healthcare screening not easily available with the NHS at the present time.' Joseph Burt, head of diagnostics and general medical devices at the MHRA, said the regulator is 'overhauling the medical device regulations to further strengthen standards'. He added: 'In the meantime, we strongly encourage anyone using a self-test to check for a CE or UKCA mark, read the instructions carefully, and seek medical advice if they're unsure about their result.'

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store