Skip to main content

Main menu

  • HOME
  • ONLINE FIRST
  • CURRENT ISSUE
  • ALL ISSUES
  • AUTHORS & REVIEWERS
  • SUBSCRIBE
  • BJGP LIFE
  • MORE
    • About BJGP
    • Conference
    • Advertising
    • eLetters
    • Alerts
    • Video
    • Audio
    • Librarian information
    • Resilience
    • COVID-19 Clinical Solutions
  • RCGP
    • BJGP for RCGP members
    • BJGP Open
    • RCGP eLearning
    • InnovAIT Journal
    • Jobs and careers

User menu

  • Subscriptions
  • Alerts
  • Log in

Search

  • Advanced search
British Journal of General Practice
Intended for Healthcare Professionals
  • RCGP
    • BJGP for RCGP members
    • BJGP Open
    • RCGP eLearning
    • InnovAIT Journal
    • Jobs and careers
  • Subscriptions
  • Alerts
  • Log in
  • Follow bjgp on Twitter
  • Visit bjgp on Facebook
  • Blog
  • Listen to BJGP podcast
  • Subscribe BJGP on YouTube
Intended for Healthcare Professionals
British Journal of General Practice

Advanced Search

  • HOME
  • ONLINE FIRST
  • CURRENT ISSUE
  • ALL ISSUES
  • AUTHORS & REVIEWERS
  • SUBSCRIBE
  • BJGP LIFE
  • MORE
    • About BJGP
    • Conference
    • Advertising
    • eLetters
    • Alerts
    • Video
    • Audio
    • Librarian information
    • Resilience
    • COVID-19 Clinical Solutions
Letters

The White Paper: a framework for survival?

Julian Tudor Hart
British Journal of General Practice 2010; 60 (579): 777. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3399/bjgp10X532431
Julian Tudor Hart
Gelli Deg, Penmaen, Swansea, SA3 2HH. E-mail:
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: julian@tudorhart.freeserve.co.uk
  • Article
  • Info
  • eLetters
  • PDF
Loading

In his editorial in the September issue,1 Roger Jones asks:

'Why do we not look to and learn from more successful health systems in which a mix of private and public provision — including insurance schemes, means testing, payments for hospital and doctor visits, and co-payments for drug treatments — lead to better patient health outcomes and greater patient satisfaction?… this, of course, is the heart of the matter: through no fault of its own, the NHS has become unaffordable …'

There is no ‘of course’ about it. If this is indeed the ‘heart of the matter', then it deserves some evidence to support all these assertions. I don't know, nor do I think Roger knows, any country anywhere where public service medical care has had media approval over the last decade of transitional promotion for marketed care. Falsehoods about NHS cancer outcomes comparable to backward and broken services in Bulgaria and Romania have been exposed as statistical nonsense by experts in this Journal.2 They depend not on better care abroad, but grossly inferior data collection in, for example, Germany, and almost none at all in the eastern Balkan republics.

Lobbying against free public services, funded from income tax, has everywhere been very well funded and very effective. It has told governments serving transnational corporate business, rather than their own electorates, just what they want to hear. Opposition to it has not even a small fraction of that funding, nor support from the leaders of any of our political parties in serious contention. Mass opposition will eventually develop, as it always does when people are seriously hurt, but for the time being most simply cannot believe that so many people who claim to be saving the NHS are actually selling it off to the strongest commercial bidder.

What we can afford is surely a matter of opinion and choice. In 1948, Nye Bevan had to push his proposals for a free national health service, funded from income tax, past not only professional opposition, but a sceptical majority of his cabinet colleagues — mainly because the UK was then virtually bankrupt. He succeeded because the government was swept in with mass support, which would not take no for an answer. There was political will. Nobody today can deny that we are richer now than we were then. Yes, I know the NHS costs more today. Of course, because it can do more. But everything else costs more too. For example, if Spitfires had cost in 1940 what Eurofighters do today, the entire RAF would possess a few dozen at most. If we can afford Trident missiles, for which even Tony Blair now sees no rational purpose (other than to assert power we no longer possess), we can afford the NHS as a public service, a gift economy, and almost our only hope for some more truly civilised and sustainable society in the future.3

Roger says ‘… western societies now have to find alternative ways to pay for health care.’ What better way is there, than income tax? In 1762 Adam Smith, founder of economics, wrote:

'The subjects of every state ought to contribute towards the support of the government, as nearly as possible, in proportion to their respective abilities; that is, in proportion to the revenue which they respectively enjoy under the protection of the state. ‘4

Those who have much depend on the state to protect them from those who have little. Differences in personal wealth are now greater than at any time over the past century. I look at the bankers, the corporate executives, the playboys, and playgirls of our increasingly decadent society, and ask why they can't afford the rising costs of a rising civilisation. Doctors must occasionally help patients to see what is in their own vital interests. This is one of those occasions.

  • © British Journal of General Practice, 2010.

REFERENCES

  1. ↵
    1. Jones R
    (2010) The White Paper: a framework for survival? Br J Gen Pract 60(578):635–636.
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  2. ↵
    1. Ouhami R
    (2010) Are UK cancer cure rates worse than most in other European countries? Br J Gen Pract 60(571):81–82.
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  3. ↵
    1. Hart JT
    (2010) The political economy of health care: where the NHS came from and where it might lead (Policy Press, Bristol), 2nd.
  4. ↵
    1. Smith A
    (1993) An enquiry into the nature and causes of the wealth of nations (1762) (Oxford University Press, Oxford).
Back to top
Previous ArticleNext Article

In this issue

British Journal of General Practice: 60 (579)
British Journal of General Practice
Vol. 60, Issue 579
October 2010
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
Download PDF
Email Article

Thank you for recommending British Journal of General Practice.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person to whom you are recommending the page knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
The White Paper: a framework for survival?
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from British Journal of General Practice
(Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from British Journal of General Practice.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
The White Paper: a framework for survival?
Julian Tudor Hart
British Journal of General Practice 2010; 60 (579): 777. DOI: 10.3399/bjgp10X532431

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero

Share
The White Paper: a framework for survival?
Julian Tudor Hart
British Journal of General Practice 2010; 60 (579): 777. DOI: 10.3399/bjgp10X532431
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One
  • Mendeley logo Mendeley

Jump to section

  • Top
  • Article
    • REFERENCES
  • Info
  • eLetters
  • PDF

More in this TOC Section

  • Multimorbidity: a problem in the body, or a problem of the system?
  • Ten things I wish I had known about academic primary care
  • The role of the GP in maximising school attendance
Show more Letters

Related Articles

Cited By...

Intended for Healthcare Professionals

BJGP Life

BJGP Open

 

Tweets by @BJGPjournal

 
 

British Journal of General Practice

NAVIGATE

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • All Issues
  • Online First
  • Authors & reviewers

RCGP

  • BJGP for RCGP members
  • BJGP Open
  • RCGP eLearning
  • InnovAiT Journal
  • Jobs and careers

MY ACCOUNT

  • RCGP members' login
  • Subscriber login
  • Activate subscription
  • Terms and conditions

NEWS AND UPDATES

  • About BJGP
  • Alerts
  • RSS feeds
  • Facebook
  • Twitter

AUTHORS & REVIEWERS

  • Submit an article
  • Writing for BJGP: research
  • Writing for BJGP: other sections
  • BJGP editorial process & policies
  • BJGP ethical guidelines
  • Peer review for BJGP

CUSTOMER SERVICES

  • Advertising
  • Contact subscription agent
  • Copyright
  • Librarian information

CONTRIBUTE

  • BJGP Life
  • eLetters
  • Feedback

CONTACT US

BJGP Journal Office
RCGP
30 Euston Square
London NW1 2FB
Tel: +44 (0)20 3188 7400
Email: journal@rcgp.org.uk

British Journal of General Practice is an editorially-independent publication of the Royal College of General Practitioners
© 2023 British Journal of General Practice

Print ISSN: 0960-1643
Online ISSN: 1478-5242