Funding the NHS?

Silly me, I thought that I had been helping towards funding it all of my life. It was called taxation.

I'm confused as well. I used to think it was funded through the NI system, but apparently it is funded through general taxation with only a small amount through NI contributions. NI contributions have gone up and up over the years as well.

How about eradicating waste and fraud? That should raise enough without us paying an extra levy which is in effect tax by another name.

Yes eradicate waste. A small example which would only have saved pennies but what do pennies make ...................!

I went to A&E with a cut on the palm of my hand which I thought would need a stitch or two. I was holding a clean pad of kitchen paper over it and applying pressure which had stopped the bleeding. I was seen by the triage nurse who declared it needed stitches and she then proceeded to put a new pad on which was held on with a lovely new bandage. Five mins later I was taken to have it stitched and of course the lovely bandages were then thrown away and yet another new one put on. No further damage could have been done to my hand with my original pad so why the 1st new one ??

Cut waste and inefficiency. I have seen many small, avoidable inefficiencies which would add up to a considerable sum.

Why to hospitals need TVs in waiting rooms? Remove them for a start.

Mr N went for an MRI scan on a Sunday recently because they were trying to catch up by why not run all these things 7 days a week? Much of the NHS machinery is extremely expensive so surely it would make sense to use it 2 extra days a week. People are not sick for only 5 days a week!

Cutting out waste and fraud would be a brilliant start - stop the foreign visitors coming and getting free treatment. I know that's a very simplistic view and things aren't as straightforward with the EC medical passport and emergencies to be dealt with etc. but I get the impression that other countries wouldn't treat us if we couldn't prove we had insurance or funds to meet the costs. Why can't we be harder about who uses our precious resources?

The most effective way is surely to have a 7 day a week service? Not just emergencies, but all those laboratories, pathology, x rays, theatres and such only being used 5 days a week apart from emergencies is wasteful. Make the overpaid consultants work a 5 day week out of 7 like the rest of the medical profession. Also, do we really need to write prescriptions for paracetamol? They are cheaper than chocolate in my Co-op, surely a GP practice could use their funds better by giving them to patients who dont pay for their prescriptions? The paperwork involved in a pharmacist fulfilling a non paying prescription then claiming it back is surely a waste of money? And a definite NO to paying for using the service, I have paid for it for years, and being fortunate to have enjoyed good health have hardly used it!

Many ladies come from European as well as African countries in the late stages of pregnancy and have the baby here for free as it is an emergency.

Many years ago, when HIV was a death sentence, again, many flew from other countries and ended up in our ITU wards, receiving very expensive drug treatment and ITU care for many weeks until they died or were transferred to an HIV ward.

epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/64407

There is already taxation on cigarettes and alcohol: in 2010, ASH claimed that 'The UK tax paid tobacco market is worth around £14 billion health related costs £5 billion)'; Revenue & Customs state that in 2009/2010, £9 billion was raised from alcohol sales (couldn't find health related costs), 'around 2% of the Government’s total revenue from taxation.' I'm not sure how much tax you could put on sugary things without it seriously harming many industries and creating more unemployment.

Information from The NHS Confederation states that the NHS has annual running costs of £105.254bnf but the NHS Choices website states that it receives a budget of [for 2012/13] 'it is around £108.9 billion' - so I'm a bit confused (but any mathematical stuff will confuse me).

Overall, compared with other countries and their version of the NHS, we do quite well.

I feel that the problem with the NHS is that it tries to be all things to all people and, if money was no object, that ethos would work. Money is a problem though and maybe the NHS needs to go back to dealing only with medical problems and only offer 'cosmetic' treatments where an adverse effect on health of a person is evident. Everything else could carry a cost contribution (which would, imo, be better than taxing everyone) that isn't covered by existing taxation (so I would exempt smokers and drinkers as they are already contributing to the NHS). I tried to find what ailment costs the most annually but couldn't find it.

I agree with others that it should be a 7 day week for the NHS, it doesn't make sense to have equipment sitting idle for two days every week.

I agree Hollydaze. Medical science has moved on so much since the inception of the NHS it is unsustainable in its present form.

Some money could be saved surely by ridding the NHS of the huge number of 'managers'. The latest silly title I've seen was 'Customer Satisfaction Manager'.

Think what could be achieved if the NHS didn't have to send £1,000,000 every hour on diabetes

Yes, indeed, if they could find a cure for diabetes it would mean other children didn't have to embark on a lifetime regime of blood tests and injections as my DS did at the age of 9. Some develop type one soon after birth.

There's a shortfall of doctors and over half of people training to be doctors are women these days are women which [without being sexist] means that they will probably work part time eventually [all of the lady doctors I know that have children work part time]. 7 day week opening will mean less doctor hours on weekdays. Maybe the staff that work at the out of hours places [which are closing down everywhere] could take over at the surgeries at weekends? By the way the Labour Party are saying they will put a helluvalot more money into the NHS than the Conservatives are planning to do [worth considering at the next election]. I'm also very concerned about this Astra takeover by Pfizer; since when has any takeover been to the benefit of the workers in this country no many what the takeover company promies initially . And one of the major problems looking to the future are the number of overweight, unfit children; more needs to be done to stop this [where are you 'Ministry for Forward Planning?].

Did you see the GP on TV, Tegan, who said that Ed's ideas regarding the NHS were very laudable but there are not enough GPs or enough premises to fulfill his promises?

No; I was at a meeting last night about the closure of our surgery and the NHS representative said he was very afraid for the future of the NHS. Mind you, it was because he was justifying taking away a service that our village has had for over 70 years. As the guy sitting next to me said 'he's scared us so much we'll all be at the doctors tomorrow asking for Prozac...'However someone we met on holiday who also works for the NHS said that a lot of GP's had been lining their own pockets over the past few years and not putting money into their surgeries. I would imagine that, somewhere in the middle lies the truth . Either way, the population of this country has to become healthier and take responsibilty for their own well being in general; I say 'in general' because I realised a long time ago that, more often than not, serious illness seems to be down to downright bad luck .

there are not enough GPs

This is stated so many times (and regarding other members of the medical profession). Any business owner, if they cannot attract staff, would look to see what the problem was and how to correct it - why isn't that being done? Why are British people not training in enough numbers to man the NHS?

One other point: when speaking to our MHKs, I suggested that we follow the route that is used in Europe: people tend to go to the pharmacist for every day healthcare and only something that a pharmacist cannot help with would necessitate a visit to the GP so given the shortages, maybe that is something that Britain should adopt. It would free up a lot of space in GP surgeries and, of course, they wouldn't be so overworked.

It always seems ridiculous to me to have someone as highly trained as a pharmacist (and they are often more up to speed on what medication can do what or should be given with another) doing nothing but pill counting.

nhap.org/what-happened-to-the-word-my-generation-built-a-eulogy-for-the-nhs/

Two thoughts: I was in a local chemists a few months ago and the person giving health advice was not a highly qualified pharmacist but a shop assistant with a bit of training. Second, why don't they increase NI contributions? None of the people presently exempted from what is charged for pay NI.

None of the people presently exempted from what is charged for pay NI.

Not sure exactly what you mean by that, Lilygran. Are you proposing that NI contributions should be increased for the working population to pay more towards the prescriptions of those who are exempt from charges...?

I do not think that is true, lilygran. I was exempt from prescription charges because of a medical condition, but I still paid NI before I retired. Same with my husband.

We must keep, cherish and protect the NHS. It is one of the country's finest social achievements. To do so we should all make a small charge for using it, in order to prevent abuse. Sadly, I don't trust the Tories. I think they are quite content to run it down and hive it off to private companies.

For me a real area of waste is admin and bureaucracy. There are legions of non clinical managers in the NHS having endless meetings and creating ever more paperwork that does not have a clinical outcome.

I agree with you Sue. The ones we come across in the course of DH's work seem to forget that at the end of the chain there are people!