SCOTTISH HEALTHCARE
Efficiency savings may not be enough
The dust may be beginning to settle after the Westminster poll but there is little let up for Scotland. We now have our sights trained on the 2011 election to the Scottish Parliament where health is again bound to be a focus for debate, says Dr Brian Keighley
E
Dr Brian Keighley is chairman of the BMA in Scotland and a practising GP in Balfron
very five years or so the political football that is the National Health Service becomes
a fierce battle for possession between the various teams that face up to one another in a general election. In the 2010 general election, however, the battle was complicated by not only the end of an unprecedented growth in NHS resources but also a crisis in public finances that threatens the significant increase in funding since Tony Blair promised to bring the UK’s health expenditure up to the European norm.
Scotland’s NHS has to cope with even more uncertainty as political control of its destiny and health policy will remain devolved to the Scottish Parliament no matter what transpires at a UK election.
What is more, whatever is delivered within Scotland is always constrained by NHS funding from within the Scottish block grant. This is determined, under the Barnett formula, by spending decisions in Westminster and is under increasing (hostile) scrutiny by UK party politicians which means it is likely to come up for debate in this next term.
I would caution those casting envious eyes across the border against a knee-jerk reaction. Future discussion of the block grant needs to be informed by Scotland’s unique problems of dispersed population, challenging geography and existing pockets of health and social deprivation.
54 nhe
The biggest lesson UK politicians of all parties have yet to learn is that solutions predicated upon London and the Home Counties hold little relevance for more socially deprived areas of England and even less for the problems of the three devolved nations.
With health inflation, even a standstill in spending means a reduction and the NHS in Scotland (NHSiS) is standing on the cliff face of expected cuts in funding in 2011-12. In other words, it might be bad now but it is likely to get worse in the very near future.
The only certainty therefore is increasing anxiety over how we will be able to meet the major challenge of maintaining clinical services for patients at the ‘front end’ while making efficiencies in ‘back office’ functions.
But there will always be competing demands. For patients, the priority will be continued access to healthcare services. For clinicians, it will be about maintaining quality of services. And for managers it will also be about meeting targets and achieving efficiencies.
Depending on the scale and duration of the public spending squeeze, efficiency savings alone may not be sufficient, and current levels of provision are by no means guaranteed. Many more difficult decisions about spending priorities will need to be made.
Scottish patients will want to know how taxpayers’ money
invested in the health service is performing. They will demand that funding decisions are not based upon ill-informed research, such as that recently published by the Nuffield Trust, which failed to compare like with like and which failed to measure health outcomes on the same basis, and focused entirely on hospital services. Instead, funding decisions should be informed by real, verifiable evidence so that it makes a difference to patient care.
Of course, Scotland’s NHS managers and clinicians will always seek to improve quality within whatever funding is available – and already work is going on to modify pathways of care to maximise effectiveness.
Just as elsewhere in the UK, all NHS functions, including so-called backroom or administrative areas, will be scrutinised to pare costs in order to preserve clinical services to patients – and major questions on service redesign will have to be asked. But these are matters for the Scottish Parliament and an acknowledgement of the reality of devolution as applied to health is a pre-requisite.
The health service will always need to be properly resourced. But that is far from the only contribution the UK government can make to health – and healthcare - in Scotland.
Arguably, implementing policies that will reduce poverty and the associated health inequalities could have the biggest impact
Jul/Aug 10
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100