NHS "investment"

I see that even the New Labour sometime house newspaper "The Sun" has worked out that Gordon Brown's "investment" in the NHS has largely been a waste of money.

"THE extra £43billion spent on the NHS has failed to make it world class, ministers were told last night.

At least HALF of the cash lavished on the NHS since 2002 has gone on wages and extra staff with no obvious improvement, a report claimed."

Well at least they will learn from their mistakes, right?

WRONG


"But it said that taxpayers should stump up even MORE money for the health service."

Why not, it's only taxpayers money - it's not as though they have to work for it.

"In 2002, Mr Brown lifted National Insurance by 1p on all wage packets in a bid to make the NHS the envy of the world. But with no increase in productivity reported, much of the money has gone to waste."

The envy of the world! The jewel in the crown" New Labour always make it seem as though the whole world envies our NHS. The NHS came 17th out of 29 European countries in a poll this year. The Euro Health Consumer Index, which has been compiled for the past three years by the Health Consumer Powerhouse, a Swedish think-tank, is the only survey that compares European health care systems from a consumer point of view. It assessed 27 indicators in five categories: patients' rights and information; waiting time for treatment; outcomes measured by certain death rates; the range of services offered by health systems; and the availability of drugs. In five categories, the UK scores just 581 points out of 1,000 compared to top place Austria's average of 806. This puts Britain behind Estonia and just above Italy and Portugal. Thanks to the Telegraph for that report, you can read more here. The Telegraph report continues "Britain did receive plaudits for patient access to information through NHS Direct, the existence of a patient's ombudsman and hospital league tables. However, the report concludes: "Despite substantial funding increases, the UK is still a mediocre overall performer.""


Do you want to be even more depressed? Read this from the same Telegraph article

"A recent study in The Lancet said survival rates in Britain were among the lowest in Europe.

Survival rates are based on the number of patients who are alive five years after diagnosis and researchers found that, for women, England was the fifth worst in a league of 22 countries. Scotland came bottom. Cancer experts blamed late diagnosis and long waiting lists.

A second Lancet article, which looked at 2.7 million patients diagnosed between 1995 and 1999, found that countries which spent the most on health per capita a year had better survival rates.

Britain was the exception. Despite spending up to £1,500 on health per person per year, it recorded similar survival rates for Hodgkin's disease and lung cancer as Poland, which spends a third of that amount.

The money "invested" in the NHS has largely been wasted, this government's management of the NHS, like its management of education, the economy, agriculture and so on, and so on, has been below poor. Finally the public are realising that there is an alternative, not a very radical one as yest, but there is an alternative and that realisation will only strengthen as the economy collapses under the sheer weight of Gordon Brown's mismanagement.


Take a look at George Pascoe-Watson's commenatry at the above Sun link, "good money after bad",