Health Secretary Lansley is pushing ahead with dilution of NHS universal standards and promoting risky plans giving GPs total budget control to buy all NHS care.
Six and a half years is a long time in politics, by any standards. But was it long enough for Andrew Lansley, as shadow health secretary, to master his brief and work out clear, readied plans for government. Serious doubts are now being raised about the coherence of Tory health plans (with little evidence of Lib Dem impact on the Coalition agenda).
Reassuring pre-election pledges about real-terms budget increases and service centralisation (requiring full local patient and GP agreement) were made by David Cameron. Yet behind these lay further rhetoric against targets and minimum standards, and promises to increase competition and private providers in NHS service provision.
Whereas other controversial commitments were dropped under the Coalition agreement, Health Secretary Lansley is pushing ahead with dilution of NHS universal standards and promoting risky plans giving GPs total budget control to buy all NHS care. An NHS-wide Department of Health edict this week abolishes targets for minimum waiting times for inpatient surgery and to see a GP, plus almost halves the NHS management cost.
There was a further question mark about the “no service centralisation”. The Guardian has reported a detailed FOI study of aortic aneurism surgery outcomes, which confirmed that death rates decrease when complex procedures are done in specialist units.
Meanwhile, there is growing concern about the policy to give NHS budgets direct to GPs – previously highlighted by LFF as “counter-cultural”.
The head of the Kings Fund health think-tank, Professor Chris Ham, recently underlined the risks of GP budget-holding, based on US experience.
Ham recommended “caution in promoting budget holding as a universal solution”, with a key concern over incentives for profit: “that [financial] surpluses may result from skimping care”. The US experience saw “a national popular backlash against capitation [budgets] from patients and physicians”. Ham however, has also recently set out the context for Lansley’s NHS inheritance: “New Labour inherited the NHS in intensive care, by 2010 it was in active rehabilitation. The issue for the coalition government is how to get it into rude health”.
The Health Services Journal, normally cheerleader for radical NHS change, suggests in a highly critical editorial that Lansley risks a collision course with the PM and Chancellor over his budget-devolution plans, given GP’s lack of enthusiasm to take them on.
Meanwhile, despite its supposed protected status, the NHS is planning for a £15-20 billion of efficiency savings by 2014. Giving NHS budgets to GPs and curbing to service changes driven by improved outcomes are likely to bring headlines for the Coalition about service cut backs and budget overspends later this year.
To reach hundreds of thousands of new readers and to make the biggest impact we can in the next general election, we need to grow our donor base substantially.
That's why in 2024, we are seeking to generate 150 additional regular donors to support Left Foot Forward's work.
We still need another 124 people to donate to hit the target. You can help. Donate today.
11 Responses to “Coalition’s NHS vision: diluting standards and incentivising profit”
d
RT @leftfootfwd: Coalition’s NHS vision: diluting standards and incentivising profit: http://bit.ly/dAWSO9
Don Quixote
Ummm… the Guardian article says that:
“Death rates DECREASE when complex surgical proceedures are done in specialist units, investigation shows.”
I assume that’s what you meant…
Trevor
Thanks Don; I stand corrected!
Worth noting that the link between a critical mass of surgical activity and outcomes is also why the NHS has for some years been promoting, for example, multi-hospital on-call rotas for vascular surgery, and is now looking seriously at major trauma centres.
Coalition’s NHS vision: diluting standards and incentivising profit « The best Labour blogs
[…] More… […]
mike
So when the elderly have to wait over a week to see the GP (because they are not economically active)they can blame the Coalition
already mayor cuts in NHS having impact on front line services
we were told no frontline cuts ????