« | Home | »

Narrow Political Interests


The Health and Social Care Bill has now passed, largely unchanged, through the report stage in the House of Lords, and on Tuesday survived by 314 votes to 260 a Labour motion in the House of Commons to scrap it. Despite widespread opposition from doctors, nurses, other NHS workers and the general public, the NHS ‘reforms’ that prioritise competition over quality of care look set to be implemented.

It’s tempting to point the finger of blame at the Lib Dems.
Campaigners at their spring conference put forward an emergency motion calling on the party to drop its support for the bill, but Lib Dems in both houses have helped to push it through parliament, even though a top-down structural reform of the NHS was explicitly ruled out by the coalition agreement in 2010.

In a letter sent to Lib Dem members before the conference, Andy Burnham wrote:

The truth is Labour’s narrow political interests are probably best served by the Coalition simply ploughing on with this disastrous Bill. But, even so, I desperately want them to stop.

There might have been a greater chance of stopping the bill if not only the Labour Party but also such bodies as the BMA had expressed more serious opposition to it a year ago.

Comments on “Narrow Political Interests”

  1. Paul Taylor says:

    I suspect Cameron is genuinely angry at Labour’s failure to offer an alternative to his ‘reforms’. He constantly replies to Labour’s attacks stating that the Labour Party knows that without these changes the NHS would, sooner rather than later, face a funding crisis. To him it is therefore hypocrisy and opportunism to oppose them. If you stop to think about it, Cameron’s point is revealing. The crisis to which he refers is not caused by the existing institutional arrangements, it is not a consequence of Trusts working cooperatively rather than in competition, or of commissioning being led by Primary Care Trusts and not Clinical Commissioning Groups. It is caused by burgeoning demand. What we are not being told, but should assume, is that the effect of the reforms will be to limit demand. The purpose of the reforms is to create a structure that will allow the politicians to escape the blame when the NHS has to cease providing some of the treatments that patients want.
    As the population gets older, and as the cheaper causes of death become less fashionable, and as technical advances enable more to be done to extend the end of life, so we can choose to spend an increasing proportion of our income on healthcare. For individuals this is a simple and obviously rational choice. For societies, it would be a humane and civilised choice. But for the politicians who would have to take the blame for the increased taxes, it is a crisis to be averted, even at the cost of the destruction of one of the country’s most cherished institutions.

Comment on this post

Log in or register to post a comment.

  • Recent Posts

    RSS – posts

  • Contributors

  • Recent Comments

    • name on Who is the enemy?: Simply stating it is correct doesn't make it so, I just wish you would apply the same epistemic vigilance to "Muslim crimes" as you do to their Hebrew...
    • Glen Newey on Unwinnable War: The legal issue admits of far less clarity than the simple terms in which you – I imagine quite sincerely – frame them. For the benefit of readers...
    • Geoff Roberts on The New Normal: The causes go back a long way into the colonial past, but the more immediate causes stem from the activities of the US forces in the name of freedom a...
    • sol_adelman on The New Normal: There's also the fact that the French state denied the mass drownings of '61 even happened for forty-odd years. No episode in post-war W European hist...
    • funky gibbon on At Wembley: If England get France in the quarter finals of Euro 16 I expect that a good deal of the fraternity will go out the window

    RSS – comments

  • Contact

  • Blog Archive

  • From the LRB Archive

    Edward Said: The Iraq War
    17 April 2003

    ‘This is the most reckless war in modern times. It is all about imperial arrogance unschooled in worldliness, unfettered either by competence or experience, undeterred by history or human complexity, unrepentant in its violence and the cruelty of its technology.’

    David Runciman:
    The Politics of Good Intentions
    8 May 2003

    ‘One of the things that unites all critics of Blair’s war in Iraq, whether from the Left or the Right, is that they are sick of the sound of Blair trumpeting the purity of his purpose, when what matters is the consequences of his actions.’

    Simon Wren-Lewis: The Austerity Con
    19 February 2015

    ‘How did a policy that makes so little sense to economists come to be seen by so many people as inevitable?’

    Hugh Roberts: The Hijackers
    16 July 2015

    ‘American intelligence saw Islamic State coming and was not only relaxed about the prospect but, it appears, positively interested in it.’

Advertisement Advertisement