Public Healthcare

Written by Colin Breed on Tue 2nd Mar 2010

The future funding, organisation and management of the NHS will not only be a potentially controversial area of debate leading up to the General Election but will have to be a strong priority for the next Government whoever wins. Our national debate on healthcare, however, is as nothing to what is taking place in the United States.

President Obama and his Democratic candidates were elected on a mandate to tackle the costs of healthcare but, now he is doing just that, he is experiencing opposition from all quarters including even in his own party. The proportion of US residents who are not covered by health insurance is large and growing - figures show around 46 million in 2007. Large numbers of the long term unemployed and their families are at risk of losing their health insurance as well.

The whole debate has become vitriolic. On one side are those who like the healthcare they have and don't want to lose it, or pay for someone else to get it. They tell everyone the US system is the best, although presumably not for those who do not have access to it. Ironically, many older people who are against others getting healthcare coverage get theirs through Medicare, which is publicly funded.

The cost of healthcare in the USA is driven up by huge malpractice awards, so doctors practice defensive medicine, doing endless tests to protect themselves from being sued. Most are unaware that health outcomes in the USA are not particularly good, even though spending per capita is easily the highest in the world, some two and a half times per head what the UK spends. Helping the poor to improve health enhances the well being of everyone. The productivity of the work force would rise as it becomes healthier.

Many US citizens are astounded that the British are happy with their system and love the NHS, which they consider is raging socialism and to be avoided at all costs. The President is going to have a hard struggle to overcome a determined opposition in the Senate, a pharmaceutical industry used to funding both political parties with huge sums to ensure their gravy train can continue, and a media failing to properly examine the truth about costs and outcomes.

However, there are some things for us to learn, with rising costs of compensation claims, driven by the lawyers, and the need to cap drug company research so that the industry tackles the illnesses and ailments Government and doctors want, rather than what they consider the most profitable. Healthcare will always be important and therefore always at the top of political party campaigning.