Cameron’s “deeply disingenuous” claims on the NHS

October 10, 2012 3:30 pm

You should never allege in writing that a politician has lied.  That will get you into trouble.  So I will call the claims of Tory NHS success that David Cameron made in his leaders speech today “deeply disingenuous”.  A simple comparison between Cameron’s claims and reality shows why.

Tories have protected the NHS budget.  £20 billion of “efficiency savings” (known to most as cuts) and a £3 billion bill for the mess Lansley created.  This means hospitals have to cut up to 5% per year from their budget.  This can’t be done without hitting frontline services.

Waiting times down.  In the first quarter of this financial year 35 trusts missed the 5% waiting less than 4 hours in A&E.  This translates to 188,000 people waiting more than 4 hours in those three months.  Waits for Hip, Knee, Hernia and Gallstone operations have increased on average by between 7 and 10 days.  Monitor has warned that the 18 week GP to hospital referral is becoming increasingly unachievable.

Number of doctors and midwifes up.  Yes – marginally.  Nurses (which Cameron conspicuously failed to mention) down – substantially.  6000+ nurses lost and more posts being abolished on a weekly basis.  This has resulted in nurses not attending ward rounds, patients not receiving timely pain relief, longer shifts etc etc.

Number of managers down.  Yes Mr Cameron, if you abolish the organisations that they work in there will be fewer managers!  However, as Chris Ham, Chair of the Kings Fund has said, making managers scapegoats is unwise and will result in worse outcomes in the NHS in the long term.

Hospital infection falling.  This is a continuation of a very strong inherited trend of declining infection rates since 2008.  If anything the rate at which infections are falling has slowed.  It is also worth noting that privately run hospitals are showing themselves to be particularly susceptible to hospital infection outbreaks.

Cancer Drugs Fund has benefitted patients.  This was Cameron’s big claim of Tory success in the NHS.  First, we should note that the £200 million, the amount spent on the drugs fund, is small in comparison to the £20 billion being stripped out the NHS.   Second, the Cancer Drugs Fund is a way of making less effective and more expensive drugs available on the NHS and breaking the control that NICE has exercised over NHS drug costs.  For each patient treated through this fund 10, 100 or in some case 1000 patients could have been treated with more effective and less expensive conventional treatments.  Simply put the Cancer Drugs Fund ensures the NHS gets less “health” for the money it spends.  Cameron recounted a conversation with a cancer sufferer who supported the fund, but failed to recount any of the conversations with big pharma executives who pushed hard for this and view it as the first step to making more money out of the NHS.  There is no English political jargon that summarises this waste, but the Americans have one: “pork barrelled spending”.

The distance between government claims and reality is notable.  Nowhere is this truer than on the NHS.  No doubt the sensible and balanced views Jeremy “safe hands” Hunt will narrow this divide!  Or not.

  • PeterBarnard

    To be fair, Tom Keeley, the 2010 Comprehensive Spending Review does show a real-terms increase in NHS current expenditure of 1.3% between 2010/11 and 2014/15 and the Coalition theory is that (about) £20bn will be taken out of “back office functions” and transferred to “front-line” medical services.

    Personally, I don’t believe that this is feasible – £20bn is about 20% of NHS expenditure and it just does not “feel right” that administration absorbs such a large proportion of NHS expenditure that such a large sum of money can be taken out with no adverse effect. Professionally qualified clinical staff are about half of the NHS workforce, and it seems reasonable to assume that the PQCS are paid a higher wage than the other half of the NHS workforce.

    But : NHS capital expenditure is due to reduce by 17% according to the 2010 CSR, so that total NHS expenditure is (in real terms) flat during the period addressed by the CSR, as near as dammit is to swearing.

    In the same period, the UK population is due to rise by 3-4%, and the rise in population of the over-60s – the age group that calls heavily on NHS resources - something like 7-8%, so that, effectively, the NHS will have the same amount of money for more people.

Latest

  • News Labour Equal marriage amendment gets Tory backing

    Labour Equal marriage amendment gets Tory backing

    From: HERBERT, Nick Sent: 20 May 2013 16:29 To: HERBERT, Nick Subject: Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Bill – voting today   Dear Colleague Thank you for your support for the Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Bill at Second Reading. You will be aware of the amendments tabled by Tim Loughton and others (new Clauses 10 & 11) to extend civil partnerships to heterosexual couples I have no issue with the principle of this proposal, but I am very worried that adding this measure to the [...]

    Read more →
  • News Whitewash report claims that there’s no such thing as DWP “league tables” for sanctions

    Whitewash report claims that there’s no such thing as DWP “league tables” for sanctions

    Whilst the Westminster village has been working itself up into a lather over the rise of UKIP and when/if there should be an EU referendum, the DWP snuck out a report on the evidence of DWP league tables that we brought you recently. It’s a total whitewash. The report – which you can read here – argues that claims of a league table are entirely down to individual managers at a number of job centres. You could call it the [...]

    Read more →
  • Featured Equal Marriage is the most important thing – but Labour can’t let Equal Civil Partnerships get the “long grass” treatment

    Equal Marriage is the most important thing – but Labour can’t let Equal Civil Partnerships get the “long grass” treatment

    So after toying with support for the Tim Loughton amendment over the weekend, Labour has decided to abstain on that particular amendment, and propose their own. Let’s be clear – the most important news today is that Equal Marriage will pass through the commons, and that’s a cause for huge celebration for all but an isolated minority in the Labour Party. I made clear this morning that I didn’t buy the argument that supporting the Loughton amendment would stop or [...]

    Read more →
  • News Labour’s Equal marriage Bill amendment on Civil Partnerships

    Labour’s Equal marriage Bill amendment on Civil Partnerships

    Labour MPs will be encouraged to back this amendment – rather than that of Tory backbencher Tim Loughton – today: House of Commons Monday 20 May 2013 CONSIDERATION OF BILL New Amendments handed in are marked thus * MARRIAGE (SAME SEX COUPLES) BILL MANUSCRIPT AMENDMENT (a) As an Amendment to Secretary Maria Miller’s proposed New Clause (Review of civil partnership) (NC16):- Kate Green (a)(a * Line 8, leave out from ‘practicable’ to end of Clause, and insert ‘and include a [...]

    Read more →
  • News Is Ed Miliband picking a fight with Google?

    Is Ed Miliband picking a fight with Google?

    In his interview with the Observer yesterday, Ed Miliband singled out Google as a company who aren’t “living up to their responsibilities” on tax, saying: ” I don’t think [Google] are living up to their responsibilities at the moment, and I will be very clear about that on Wednesday. It is part of a culture of irresponsibility. If everyone approaches their tax affairs as some of these companies have approached their tax affairs we wouldn’t have a health service, we wouldn’t [...]

    Read more →