Liberal Democrats have been talking a lot about health and social care this week. In the Yorkshire Post, Norman Lamb argues for an urgent change of direction to give the NHS a sustainable future which meets our needs.
First he seems out the crisis facing the NHS.
But it seems this Conservative Government has become increasingly ambivalent to the state of our health service. In Yorkshire, vital A&E wards in Dewsbury, Huddersfield and Scarborough are all at risk of being closed or downgraded – it’s the same over the border at Darlington. Communities are set to face even longer waits for emergency care, including those in rural areas who may soon have to travel hours to receive treatment. These changes are happening for a simple reason – this Conservative government is failing to give the NHS and care services the cash they need to cope with rising demand. To make matters worse, local people on the ground are not being given a say into these decisions which will have a huge impact on their lives. The stark reality is that we are seeing the gradual downgrading of our health service taking place behind closed doors.
He attacked the use of well-paid consultancy firms drawing up cuts in services with no consultation of the public.
So what is the solution? It’s two-fold. First of all a cross party commission:
To overcome these problems, we need to work across party divides and have a full and frank debate that fully involves local communities across the country. That is why I am calling for a cross-party NHS and Care Convention to engage the public with the aim of delivering a long-term settlement for the NHS and care. I have launched a petition which now has over 16,000 signatures, calling on Theresa May to urgently seek a cross-party solution to the health and care crisis.
And it isn’t going to come free:
The public are crying out for politicians to stop shouting at each other, and instead work together to make difficult decisions to ensure that patients get the right care and treatment. That should include being honest with the public about the scale of the funding gap that our health service faces. To secure the long-term future of the NHS and care, we may all have to pay a little more in tax. The Liberal Democrats are prepared to make that case. We hope that others will join us in making it too.
You can read the whole article here.
* Newshound: bringing you the best Lib Dem commentary in print, on air or online.
Follow @libdemvoice.org on Bluesky
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
The mysterious mole men of New York caught on video
Doing better? The goal must be Sufficeincy
Michael Meadowcroft (1942-2026) - A Liberal to His Core
Labour deputy claims that Farage is a threat to democracy
Rob Heale
Mick Taylor
Jason Connor
Chloe
17 Comments
It would take 2p on the basic rate of income tax to bring the NHS up to speed. Clearly, social care is collapsing mainly due to the Coalition’s cuts in 2010/15. That will take another 1p plus. Then more again in five years. I don’t think general taxation is a viable way of raising funds for very specific needs like this. We need a third deduction from earnings, social insurance. People would be obliged to pay an annual insurance premium and in return would receive health and social care rights. It would be government sponsored, so adults of the same age would pay the same premium regardless of health. There would be exemptions for the very poor, though complete exemptions would be rare.
The system can no longer stay as it is. It doesn’t work anymore.
I have heard that NHS hospitals pay business rates. as do schools.However here comes the downright unfairness of the system. Private hospitals and schools mentioned as Academies are classed as charities and as a result pay LESS business rates screwing the system towards private concerns and the rest of us pay the bill. Reduce NHS rates and make it a level playing field.
Norman Lamb is to be applauded for his tireless campaigning on the NHS.
The appalling state of our health service is the greatest crisis facing our country right now. Sadly, the NHS has been so unsatisfactory for so long, that people have become resigned to it.
Survival rates for cancer patients, for example, are very poor compared with several other European countries. This is unacceptable.
Norman Lamb is right in calling for politicians of all parties to work together to solve this crisis.
@Philip Rolle
What makes you think that the voters would not accept 2p on income tax for the NHS? 1p on income tax for education was a popular policy back in 2005. What we need, and what Norman Lamb is doing, is to tell people that they cannot have a quality health and social care service and keep cutting expenditure on it (so-called efficiency savings) at the same time.
@Laurence Cox
Paying extra income tax does not confer enforceable rights. Paying a social insurance premium would. So if an operation was cancelled, a patient would have redress. If a government had to refund twice the annual premium, I rather fancy there would be fewer cancelled operations. I also think that people would prefer hypothecation.
One obvious solution is to progressively raise the rate of NI above the upper threshold to 12% . The idea that NI is only progressive for poorer people means that our effective tax rates are 32% and 42%. There is a strong argument for widening this gap. Each 1p increase would raise about £1billion. Since NI is already not a fixed contribution (a poll tax) there is no matter of principle involved.
Alternatively, in classic Chancellor obfuscation, introduce the new social contribution on all incomes but simultaneously reduce the 12% NI rate!
Phillip Rolle,
” We need a third deduction from earnings, social insurance. People would be obliged to pay an annual insurance premium and in return would receive health and social care rights. It would be government sponsored, so adults of the same age would pay the same premium regardless of health”
This isn’t social insurance its a flat rate poll tax. Fails on the progressive front as the poor pay as much as the rich. May play well to right wing Tories but fails to address the concerns of anyone who cares. The poor paying as much as the rich, give me peace.
“This isn’t social insurance its a flat rate poll tax”
Quite.
And, for those too young to remember, 1989-90 that poll tax went down like a lead balloon.
Apples and bananas cost the same for everyone. So too healthcare, except in extreme poverty. I see no problem with this. It will certainly mean that health and social care is funded properly.
As usual with the NHS, I see lots of indignation and cries of “wicked Tories”, but rarely a discussion of alternative means of funding
Progressive taxation Philip much better than a flat poll tax. The fact you seem to think that the poor can actually pay enough in insurance to pay for an adequate NHS suggests to me you know little of the dire straits a large number of our fellow citizens are in. They try your approach in the USA, lots of people go bankrupt try to pay for it.
The Huddersfield A&E closure is plan which started several years ago (the original consultation was to downgrade Halifax) when Norman was a Health Minister so well predates the current post 2015 government.
When Norman was Health minister NHS funding increased at historically low levels – that must at least have contributed to the current problems (point 6)
http://www.bbc.com/news/health-38887694
@ Philip Rowe
“It would be government sponsored, so adults of the same age would pay the same premium regardless of health. There would be exemptions for the very poor, though complete exemptions would be rare.”
Which adults do you think should be exempt from paying your health premium?
Retired people on just the state pension or receiving pension credits?
Unemployed people struggling to live on £73.10 a week (or those under 26 struggling on only £57.90).
Those with a long term illness or disability?
(In June 2015 there were 11.6 million aged 65 or over. In January 2016 there were about 2.3 million people receiving “ESA /Incapacity Benefits”. Oct-Dec 2015 there were nearly 1.6 million unemployed of which about 745,000 received Jobseekers Allowance or Universal Credit. Then there are the 2.29 million students and 3.23 million people of working age who are not in these groups. [I have not included the 4.9 million who receive in work benefits.] This is just over 21.02 million people out of a population of about 65.5 million. This is nearly a third of the population. If the approximate 12.5 million children were excluded it would be nearly 40% of the adult population.)
Money is not the only factor.
Since 2008, 67 per cent of ministers and 59 per cent of senior civil servants dealing with health have gone on to posts in “health” businesses. (Daily Mail 03/04/16)
This fact and many other factors indicate that there has been and is a macro but unstated policy of engineered degradation of the NHS which facilitates increasing corporate privatisation of national services, assets and real estate.
“To secure the long-term future of the NHS and care, we may all have to pay a little more in tax.”
While I don’t have a problem with this, in coalition government the Lib Dems seemed to take the opposite position, that we should all pay a little less income tax (apart from those who were going to university). I really don’t know what the party stands for these days: it all seems a little bit opportunistic and unprincipled.
Why is general taxation “not viable” for NHS funding but income tax is? Income tax is likely to be fairer than anything else. OK, hypothecated taxes can be a way of getting past people’s hostility to taxation (which they consider likely to be wasted), but it’s dangerous. You end up with all the easy-to-sell government expenditure hypothecated and the rest, which is still necessary, clobbered. If we want to get more participation in deciding spending priorities, we can go for radical devolution (spending decisions like others taken closer to the people) and for local community budget-setting exercises, with the national expenditure elements being advisory.
Sorry – CORRECTION – “Why is general taxation “not viable” for NHS funding, but a health levy is?”.