Skip to main content

Cameron: OffSick

Where to start on David Cameron's dim witted idea to fining health care trusts that do not hit targets on MRSA?

The last thing that hospitals that are already struggling with erratic funding need to deal with is some extra complication that could reduce the transparency of their funding still further.

A free market would probably respond by pricing in an acceptable level of MRSA risk- is that what Mr. Cameron really wants? Well, no, he probably wants to eliminate MRSA risk completely. That however requires strict hygiene rules- probably including drastically limiting visitor access to the wards- a policy likely to be highly unpopular. However Dave doesn't think about "unintended consequences".

As for the "independent" regulator of the Health service- presumably called OffSick in line with OffWat and OffTel- I have to ask why the current Department of Health is not able to perform this function? How much disruption and extra cost would the creation of such a regulator cause? Frankly, how effective it likely to be anyway? Has anyone done a cost-benefit analysis on this project?

These ideas from Cameron are totally half baked. At a time when much heat and light is already being generated by the supposedly unacceptable fact that the health service delivers different services depending on which of the home nations that it serves, the fact is that diversity is becoming built-in to our health care system. While it is clearly right that minimum safety standards should be enforced, this gimmicky policy of fines is an absurd waste of time. I have no problem with diversity of supply in health care, but the implications of this Conservative policy are expensive and wasteful.


Edis said…
I believe another suggestion for such an NHS Off-org is 'Offtrolley'.
Praguetory said…
"A free market would probably respond by pricing in an acceptable level of MRSA risk"

What is clear to me is that the current level of MRSA/CD risk is unacceptable. I believe 1 patient per 30 bed ward dies a year - in absolute terms this is twice the number of people that die on the roads. It is wholly unacceptable and whilst some belated attempts seem to have been undertaken by the govt far more is needed.

If an unintended consequence relates to changes in visiting regimes I think we can handle that.

Popular posts from this blog

Post Truth and Justice

The past decade has seen the rise of so-called "post truth" politics.  Instead of mere misrepresentation of facts to serve an argument, political figures began to put forward arguments which denied easily provable facts, and then blustered and browbeat those who pointed out the lie.  The political class was able to get away with "post truth" positions because the infrastructure that reported their activity has been suborned directly into the process. In short, the media abandoned long-cherished traditions of objectivity and began a slow slide into undeclared bias and partisanship.  The "fourth estate" was always a key piece of how democratic societies worked, since the press, and later the broadcast media could shape opinion by the way they reported on the political process. As a result there has never been a golden age of objective media, but nevertheless individual reporters acquired better or worse reputations for the quality of their reporting and

We need to talk about UK corruption

After a long hiatus, mostly to do with indolence and partly to do with the general election campaign, I feel compelled to take up the metaphorical pen and make a few comments on where I see the situation of the UK in the aftermath of the "Brexit election". OK, so we lost.  We can blame many reasons, though fundamentally the Conservatives refused to make the mistakes of 2017 and Labour and especially the Liberal Democrats made every mistake that could be made.  Indeed the biggest mistake of all was allowing Johnson to hold the election at all, when another six months would probably have eaten the Conservative Party alive.  It was Jo Swinson's first, but perhaps most critical, mistake to make, and from it came all the others.  The flow of defectors and money persuaded the Liberal Democrat bunker that an election could only be better for the Lib Dems, and as far as votes were concerned, the party did indeed increase its vote by 1.3 million.   BUT, and it really is the bi

Media misdirection

In the small print of the UK budget we find that the Chancellor of the Exchequer (the British Finance Minister) has allocated a further 15 billion Pounds to the funding for the UK track and trace system. This means that the cost of the UK´s track and trace system is now 37 billion Pounds.  That is approximately €43 billion or US$51 billion, which is to say that it is amount of money greater than the national GDP of over 110 countries, or if you prefer, it is roughly the same number as the combined GDP of the 34 smallest economies of the planet.  As at December 2020, 70% of the contracts for the track and trace system were awarded by the Conservative government without a competitive tender being made . The program is overseen by Dido Harding , who is not only a Conservative Life Peer, but the wife of a Conservative MP, John Penrose, and a contemporary of David Cameron and Boris Johnson at Oxford. Many of these untendered contracts have been given to companies that seem to have no notewo