David Cameron has unveiled the first draft of his party's election manifesto – the section on the NHS.
Saying that he represents 'the party of the NHS', Cameron used the document to set out 20 health policies.
The two key ideas he outlined were a pledge to direct more health spending to poorer areas to tackle the growing gap in life expectancy between the wealthier and less well off, and a new maternity service that would link up local hospitals, doctors, charities, voluntary groups and maternity consultants to share information, expertise and services.
The first of these represents a significant policy change for the Conservatives, whose 2005 manifesto carried the pledge to subsidise those who chose to have their treatment in private hospitals.
The government is also doing its best to woo the health sector – or at least to keep it on-side. Although, according to the Chancellor, from 2011 3.9m public sector workers will have their pay increases capped at 1%, health spending itself will be safe.
The Chancellor used December's Pre-Budget Report to promise that, on public spending after 2011, 'frontline services' including health would rise the same rate as inflation once the NHS's current settlement with the Treasury runs out at the end of 2010-11.
Critics point out that this figure only covers 95% of NHS spending and is far less than the 7% increases that the health service has got used to over the past decade. At the same time, trends show that the NHS will see increasing demand as people live longer. This will mean that an inflation rise will very quickly begin to feel like a cut. Furthermore, the definition of 'frontline' is a nebulous one.
Matching this, Cameron has also pledged that spending on the NHS will at least rise in line with inflation from 2011-14 if the Conservatives win the next election. Admitting that the rise in the health budget would be very small when compared with recent years, he added that spending alone cannot protect the NHS; it will need an intensification of reforms.
The problem a government of either colour will face is how it will pay for these commitments. Recent analysis by the King's Fund and the Institute for Fiscal Studies outlined that a 1% real increase in funding for the next three years for the NHS would mean real cuts of over 12% in all other spending departments. It seems that both parties will need to set out more detail on this issue.
Whichever party forms the government after the next election, it will inherit an NHS facing the toughest financial challenge in its history.
Saying that he represents 'the party of the NHS', Cameron used the document to set out 20 health policies.
The two key ideas he outlined were a pledge to direct more health spending to poorer areas to tackle the growing gap in life expectancy between the wealthier and less well off, and a new maternity service that would link up local hospitals, doctors, charities, voluntary groups and maternity consultants to share information, expertise and services.
The first of these represents a significant policy change for the Conservatives, whose 2005 manifesto carried the pledge to subsidise those who chose to have their treatment in private hospitals.
The government is also doing its best to woo the health sector – or at least to keep it on-side. Although, according to the Chancellor, from 2011 3.9m public sector workers will have their pay increases capped at 1%, health spending itself will be safe.
The Chancellor used December's Pre-Budget Report to promise that, on public spending after 2011, 'frontline services' including health would rise the same rate as inflation once the NHS's current settlement with the Treasury runs out at the end of 2010-11.
Critics point out that this figure only covers 95% of NHS spending and is far less than the 7% increases that the health service has got used to over the past decade. At the same time, trends show that the NHS will see increasing demand as people live longer. This will mean that an inflation rise will very quickly begin to feel like a cut. Furthermore, the definition of 'frontline' is a nebulous one.
Matching this, Cameron has also pledged that spending on the NHS will at least rise in line with inflation from 2011-14 if the Conservatives win the next election. Admitting that the rise in the health budget would be very small when compared with recent years, he added that spending alone cannot protect the NHS; it will need an intensification of reforms.
The problem a government of either colour will face is how it will pay for these commitments. Recent analysis by the King's Fund and the Institute for Fiscal Studies outlined that a 1% real increase in funding for the next three years for the NHS would mean real cuts of over 12% in all other spending departments. It seems that both parties will need to set out more detail on this issue.
Whichever party forms the government after the next election, it will inherit an NHS facing the toughest financial challenge in its history.
Comments