Norman Lamb writes: A landmark for the NHS – and a line in the sand for mental health

The first mandate between the Government and the NHS Commissioning Board was published today, setting out the priorities for the health service over the next two years. It reaffirms our commitment to a comprehensive and universal NHS, available to all based on need rather than on your ability to pay. Its overriding aim is to make the NHS work better for patients.

The Mandate was drawn up following widespread consultation over the summer. Key goals contained within it include:

  • Improving standards of care, especially for the elderly
  • Better diagnosis, treatment and care for people with dementia
  • Better care for women during pregnancy, childbirth and the postnatal period
  • Making it easier for patients to give feedback
  • Making it easier to access GP services – booking appointments and ordering repeat prescriptions, and accessing your own health records – online
  • Preventing premature deaths from the biggest killers
  • Putting mental health on an equal footing with physical health

There is lots to be pleased about within the Mandate: its focus on outcomes rather than processes, on quality of care as well as quality of treatment, and on the patient’s experience rather than the institution’s convenience.

However, one aspect that we can be particularly proud of is the attention that is paid to mental health. Rather than being treated as a separate minority concern, awareness and consideration of mental health is written right through the Mandate.

At Liberal Democrat Conference in September we had a very good debate about what more could and should be done to improve matters for people suffering from mental health problems in this country. ‘Parity of esteem’ (placing mental health care on a par with physical health care) is now written in to the Mandate and ensuring more open access to the IAPT programme (Improving Access to Psychological Therapies), highlighted at Conference, is one of the ways in which this will be measured.

Ed Miliband seems only recently to have woken up to this issue – perhaps because he can see that the Coalition is determined to make genuine progress on this. The last Labour government consistently treated mental health as a second class service: introducing an 18-week waiting time target for physical health but not for mental health and specifically excluding mental health service users from the right to choose where, and by whom, you are treated. The absurd but inevitable result was a health service in which the bias towards physical health has been institutionalised, despite all the evidence demonstrating the fundamental importance of mental health.

Today’s publication of the Mandate marks a line in the sand. I have talked before, both on these pages and elsewhere about moving from rhetoric to reality. The Mandate does this. It is a statement of intent, of our commitment to improving mental health care in this country. It also, crucially, clearly sets out how the Commissioning Board will be held to account for delivering on that commitment.

* Norman Lamb is MP for North Norfolk and was Liberal Democrat Minister of State at the Department of Health until May 2015

Read more by or more about , or .
This entry was posted in News.
Advert

5 Comments

  • Norman Lamb side stepped the issue that mental health funding has fell for the first time in ten years. How can Norman argue Labour didn’t recognise the importance of mental health while the coalition’s funding for it has fallen?

  • It’s a very good thing that, at last, mental health is being treated with the seriousness it deserves, but when you’ve been waiting over six months (as I have) for any kind of treatment beyond medication and a leaflet about crisis services, it all seems like a lot of talk and still no change.

  • If they are serious about the NHS being about need and not ability to pay, how about abolishing prescription charges? I have to pay for medicine that I need.

Post a Comment

Lib Dem Voice welcomes comments from everyone but we ask you to be polite, to be on topic and to be who you say you are. You can read our comments policy in full here. Please respect it and all readers of the site.

If you are a member of the party, you can have the Lib Dem Logo appear next to your comments to show this. You must be registered for our forum and can then login on this public site with the same username and password.

To have your photo next to your comment please signup your email address with Gravatar.

Your email is never published. Required fields are marked *

*
*
Please complete the name of this site, Liberal Democrat ...?

Advert



Recent Comments

  • User AvatarMichael BG 19th Aug - 1:57am
    @ David Raw One should assume it was the majority decision of the Federal Policy Committee who set the terms of reference for the Social...
  • User AvatarKatharine Pindar 19th Aug - 1:50am
    David R., you and Lorenzo have put me in fits of laughter, which is a nice way to end the night, thank you! But, David,...
  • User AvatarLorenzo Cherin 19th Aug - 12:16am
    David Raw You can mock all night but several goes does not deal with substantive comments yours , mine , any. I say I am,...
  • User Avatarfrankie 18th Aug - 11:20pm
    Riverside (Aylesbury Vale) result: CON: 34.7% (+3.7) LDEM: 32.9% (+17.4) LAB: 24.2% (+6.5) UKIP: 5.5% (-30.3) GRN: 2.6% (+2.6) Interesting to see the Lib Dems...
  • User AvatarMartin 18th Aug - 10:28pm
    Surely it is time to stop harking on about the EU,which will soon be history as far as Britain is concerned,and to start thinking about...
  • User AvatarDavid Raw 18th Aug - 10:21pm
    @ Michael BG "I recall that the Social Security Policy Group was told not to include any new spending in its proposals. A clear failure...