NHS Funding Splurge

I am in favour improving our health and social care system, provided we can afford it. But in politics, affordability is a word used gravely in committee rooms, not in manifestos. Bereft of ideas and bogged down in a futile quest for compromise in the EU negotiation, the government seems intent on seizing the compassion high ground by announcing a massive cash injection to the sacred NHS. Not just a sticking plaster but a continuous transfusion of cash designed to disinfect the Tory brand and pre-empt the opposition.  But I wonder if just giving the NHS more cash is the answer? Firstly, are we sure the NHS is already spending our money wisely and efficiently? And what percentage of additional cash would be swallowed up by a Parkinson’s Law growth in bureaucracy and administration - a lot more fat Controllers? Both good questions, I’m sure you agree, but we are unlikely to get any answers in the headlong political rush to buy votes. The money, we are told will have to come from additional taxation, with which we are told we are mostly in favour, or additional borrowing for our heirs and successors to pay off. Neither funding source would help the economy grow so that future increases in health spending become sustainable.  On the other hand, at the moment we borrow about £14 billion a year to give away in overseas aid. And then there is the £12 billion a year we give to the EU. That’s £26 billion a year or a cool £500 million a week to spend. That would be more than enough to fund the 4% a year increase demanded by Simon Stevens without vandalising the defence budget again. One condition I would recommend inserting before handing over the cash, however; tell us in advance exactly how the cash will be spent and the measurable outcomes it will achieve.  Otherwise, go for it - that would be a tune to set Conservative hearts beating!