'We shouldn't be scared of the private sector'
'Individuals should be able to choose where they get their healthcare'
There has been strong opposition to the idea of the private sector having more involvement in providing NHS care. But in this wek's Scrubbing Up column, Matt James of the Private Hospitals Alliance says we should not be sqeamish about using the sector's expertise - and allowing individuals to choose who gives them healthcare.
Just like the NHS, the BBC is a great institution. It's one of the things about Britain that makes us all proud. Contribution to its funding is compulsory, delivery is free.
You probably like it since you're here reading this website.
The chances are that you also read other news websites. Perhaps you read a newspaper as well or even watch a non-BBC TV channel.
But why? Why do you need a choice? Why would you want more than the BBC as a source of news and information? Why would you pay for a newspaper or put up with TV advertising when you've already paid for the BBC?
Hardly anyone thinks that we'd be better off if our only source of news was the BBC.
We also believe in a free press, and would robustly defend our right to read whatever we choose.
Although we know newspaper owners are there to make money, we believe that most editors and journalists have some integrity and are committed to bringing us accurate news.
How strange, then, that the reverse is true for the NHS.
When it comes to our health, anybody who believes in freedom of choice, as I do, has to argue that it's a good idea.
In health, a state monopoly is simply accepted, and choice and competition seem dangerous.
'Be sceptical of preaching'I disagree.
“Start Quote
End QuoteWhy not let more people have more choices about where and how they are treated?”
The best thing about the NHS is fairness. It's the promise that when we need it, it will be there. We won't need to worry about how to pay for it and nobody is excluded.
Not only is this emotionally appealing, it makes economic and political sense.
The USA spends more per capita on public healthcare than we do, yet many millions more people must still pay their own way.
I believe this is a direct result of failing to care for those people who face the greatest healthcare problems.
I also believe in personal choice and freedom. There's far too much fear and anger in the debates about our health system and I encourage you to be sceptical of anyone preaching that you're better off with less choice and control, or with a one-size-fits-all approach to healthcare.
Trust
I support the NHS. Of course I do.
Despite working closely with private healthcare, I use the NHS more than I use private hospitals. My GP is an NHS GP, my daughters were born in NHS maternity wards and if they hurt themselves I'll call an NHS ambulance.
There's no such thing as a private patient, only people who choose to receive some of their healthcare privately.
People who can afford it have always had choice, control and access to private hospitals.
But, that same choice has not been shared by the vast majority of NHS patients.
So why not let more people have more choices about where and how they are treated? Choice for patients doesn't undermine or harm the NHS, it improves it.
Hundreds of thousands of NHS patients do choose independent hospitals each year.
Yet this is continues to be a tiny proportion of NHS activity, accounting for less than 1% of the NHS budget.
But in some fields it is significant. For example, Ramsay Health Care, running independent hospitals across the country, delivers more orthopaedic (bones and joints) surgery to NHS patients than any single NHS organisation.
Private hospitals have considerable expertise and are keen to share this with the NHS.
Much more could be done to take advantage of this expertise and improve healthcare for all patients.
Several million people use private hospitals each year and around 10m people buy a daily newspaper.
Neither of these activities is particularly exclusive or elitist. People know what is best for them and they like to have a choice.
I think we should trust them.
~RS~q~RS~~RS~z~RS~25~RS~)


Vitamin C can kill drug-resistant TB
US rescuers comb tornado-hit area
Striking a chord
Light relief
Law of the land
Under the hood
A novel idea?
Comment number 12.
CPslashM29th June 2011 - 21:58
Choice is only good for those able to choose. Those for whom the market is available.
Choice is bad.
If politicians had no choice of providers, they would have to concentrate on improving all services in case they had to use them.
Link to this (Comment number 12)
Comment number 11.
CPslashM29th June 2011 - 21:51
If the doctors and nurses are good at their jobs, why would I want to choose others? If they are not, they should not be practicing. If they could be but are strung by bureaucracy, ditch the red tape.
Mass production is most efficient, so is standardised medical practice.
Most efficient of all is prevention - but that takes lifestyle changes and thus restricts personal freedom...
Link to this (Comment number 11)
Comment number 10.
Val29th June 2011 - 12:56
Part of the trouble with 'independent' providers is that they are less amenable to regulation. They share less information with regulators, using the excuse that their data is 'commercially sensitive'. The national regulator has a hard enough time getting ahold of what it needs to ensure patient safety now without a whole load of private clinics refusing to play ball.
Link to this (Comment number 10)
Comment number 9.
James27th June 2011 - 10:31
Anyone who argues that private treatment is good for choice, has clearly a vested interest.
People want the closest hospital to them to be good, and safe - end of.
Private companies will only cherry pick profitable patients, and leave the NHS to deal with the 'expensive ones' - with less money to do it with.
Clearly outsourcing is only cheap if your an accountant!
Link to this (Comment number 9)
Comment number 8.
Chris mather27th June 2011 - 9:44
A huge proportion of 'total healthcare' is already privately provided ... drugs, medical supplies & equipment, food & catering, building work, etc. GPs are independant contractors not NHS employees!
Can't understand what the fuss is about, so long as "free at the ponit of need" is maintained.
If I'm ill or injured, I just want the best possible treatment ASAP and I don't care who provies it.
Link to this (Comment number 8)
Comments 5 of 12