Revealed: where the extra NHS cash is really spent
Tony Bliar has failed to transform the National Health Service despite the biggest government spending spree in the 60-year history of the welfare state, according to an independent audit.
The “unprecedented” injection of more than £30 billion of taxpayers’ money into the service has achieved “significant” benefits, says the study, but has yet to translate into clear gains in the nation’s health. “There has been significant improvement in most areas the government has focused policies on,” concludes an analysis published this weekend by the King’s Fund, an independent health research group. “However, the NHS as a whole has not yet been transformed.”
The report, commissioned by The Sunday Times, states that “important problems” remain and that “there is as yet no firm evidence to show that Labour’s reforms have produced a marked difference in health outcomes”.
The findings come as public spending emerges as a key election battleground between Labour and the Conservatives. Blair has accused the Tories of planning to cut spending by £35 billion; the Tories argue that they will maintain spending increases but at a more prudent rate than Labour.
Since Blair declared that he would “save” the health service, spending on the NHS in England has jumped from £34 billion in 1997-98 to £69 billion this year.
The soaring budget has reduced waiting times and increased the number of doctors and nurses, say the authors; most patients now get to see their GP promptly and are treated within four hours if they attend an accident and emergency department.
“Overall the results of the audit undertaken by the King’s Fund are positive,” said Niall Dickson, its chief executive. “Is the NHS service better than it was in 1997? The answer is yes — but so it should be since the budget has more than doubled.”
By 2008 Britain will be devoting 9% of its gross domestic product to health, a level comparable with other European nations. Yet standards of care remain better in other leading European Union countries. The King’s Fund believes that many improvements are still feeding through the NHS but gives warning that flaws remain.
The audit’s findings include:
# The bulk of new funding for the NHS is being eaten up by pay increases for staff and other “cost pressures”.
# The funding increase left for new hospital services in 2004- 05 was only 2.4% despite an overall increase of 12%.
# Figures for new doctors and nurses are overstated because more NHS staff are working part-time.
# Waiting lists are coming down but some waits for diagnostic tests for cancer and other diseases are increasing.
# MRSA infections are still a “significant problem” for the NHS.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/newspaper/0,,176-1533370,00.html
The “unprecedented” injection of more than £30 billion of taxpayers’ money into the service has achieved “significant” benefits, says the study, but has yet to translate into clear gains in the nation’s health. “There has been significant improvement in most areas the government has focused policies on,” concludes an analysis published this weekend by the King’s Fund, an independent health research group. “However, the NHS as a whole has not yet been transformed.”
The report, commissioned by The Sunday Times, states that “important problems” remain and that “there is as yet no firm evidence to show that Labour’s reforms have produced a marked difference in health outcomes”.
The findings come as public spending emerges as a key election battleground between Labour and the Conservatives. Blair has accused the Tories of planning to cut spending by £35 billion; the Tories argue that they will maintain spending increases but at a more prudent rate than Labour.
Since Blair declared that he would “save” the health service, spending on the NHS in England has jumped from £34 billion in 1997-98 to £69 billion this year.
The soaring budget has reduced waiting times and increased the number of doctors and nurses, say the authors; most patients now get to see their GP promptly and are treated within four hours if they attend an accident and emergency department.
“Overall the results of the audit undertaken by the King’s Fund are positive,” said Niall Dickson, its chief executive. “Is the NHS service better than it was in 1997? The answer is yes — but so it should be since the budget has more than doubled.”
By 2008 Britain will be devoting 9% of its gross domestic product to health, a level comparable with other European nations. Yet standards of care remain better in other leading European Union countries. The King’s Fund believes that many improvements are still feeding through the NHS but gives warning that flaws remain.
The audit’s findings include:
# The bulk of new funding for the NHS is being eaten up by pay increases for staff and other “cost pressures”.
# The funding increase left for new hospital services in 2004- 05 was only 2.4% despite an overall increase of 12%.
# Figures for new doctors and nurses are overstated because more NHS staff are working part-time.
# Waiting lists are coming down but some waits for diagnostic tests for cancer and other diseases are increasing.
# MRSA infections are still a “significant problem” for the NHS.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/newspaper/0,,176-1533370,00.html
posted by Dr Search- Principal Consultant at the Search Clinic at
12:12 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home