England’s National Health Service , No more money for the NHS, says Philip Hammond


THE National Health Service (NHS) is in a sickly state. In the first week of this year, eight of England’s 153 acute hospital trusts issued a “black alert”, the most serious level of warning, after becoming so stretched that they were “unable to deliver comprehensive care” to patients. The immediate cause of the crunch is the winter weather, but the health service’s long-term problem is financial. Britain-wide spending on health as a share of GDP in 2014-15 was 7.3%, lower than in most of its peers. That figure is projected to fall to 6.6% by 2021. No other rich European country is going through as steep a deceleration in funding.

The worsening condition of the health service has prompted calls for more money to be made available. But Philip Hammond, the chancellor of the exchequer, has told The Economist that there is no spare money for the NHS, nor any appetite for raising taxation.

“We’ve got to work within the existing envelope. We don’t have any spare cash. There isn’t a pool of cash available,” the chancellor said in an interview on January 9th. “We’ve been asked to provide the NHS with a certain amount of funding by its own management through to 2020. We’ve done that and more, and we expect the NHS to deliver within that envelope.”

And he all but ruled out tax increases. “Additional public spending has to be financed by additional taxation and I don’t personally think there’s going to be a great appetite for that, given where we are, given that rising inflation will squeeze wages this year. I don’t imagine a great enthusiasm for rising taxes,” he said.

The chancellor argued that some parts of the health service were meeting their targets with their current budgets, and that it was up to others to do the same. “Across the NHS there is dramatic variation in performance and I don’t think it is appropriate to start talking about more resource when it’s already clear that in the best-performing areas the existing resources are being made to deliver quite adequately,” he said. “The problem we’ve got is a bit like the problem of the UK economy as a whole, really: the best-performing areas do not cover 100% of the country. And we’ve got to make sure that, whether it’s prescribing practice, hospital performance, health and social care interfaces, we spread best practice.”


What did they think was going to happen once they stated letting in swarms of violent and filthy third-worlders into their country? No skills and no jobs…but plenty of ailments that they expect the citizen of the UK to make all better for them.


13,077 overseas patients were treated at 90 UK NHS hospitals in 2015-16; health tourism is costing UK taxpayers £280 million every year.


Yep. This is what happens when you have socialized healthcare. The taxpayers pay for the treatment of others, including the unproductive and the non-citizens.


I expect that the NHS, being a government agency, is a massive bureaucracy.

Being that a bureaucracy’s main function is to preserve the bureaucracy, I also expect that patients are the first to feel any strain in cash flow.

This is how all government agencies work.


It must be good if government runs it, LOL.


There won’t be any money here for insurance either once the orange charlatan takes over as your ruler and the oppressor of common Americans.


Sorry but you are way wrong.

Costs are escalating at double digits now.

Americans are fat, overweight, obese. A product of poor lifestyle choices.

To many delayed payment services built into the premiums.

That has nothing to do with the trumpster.