Is the NHS safe in his hands?

[GSG]

The new choice of chief executive of the NHS has been somewhat controversial. Simon Stevens was a bigwig in an American private healthcare company, UniversalHealth and during his time there fought long and hard to stop even a modest step towards universal healthcare. Now, whether or not universal healthcare should happen in the US is one matter (and one that we have debated, and should continue, to debate elsewhere) but can he be trusted with the NHS, or is this a cynical move by the government towards privatisation? Whilst there are problems with the NHS - not unlike any country's preferred system - I have yet to meet anyone who wants universal private healthcare in this country. Whilst his proposed salary of £189k amounts to a pay cut for him, it is still well in excess of the usual amount for chief public officials. Why?

Many have suggested that the chief executive of the NHS should be someone from within the system, who knows how it works and will seek to protect its interests. Healthcare (along with education, and I've got plenty of gripes about that which will follow) should not be a business and privatisation does not always lead to higher standards, and for evidence of that I gesture tiredly at our train system and our energy companies. Here are some interesting article about the appointment.

http://www.theguardian.com/society/2013 ... -executive

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/po ... rnalSearch

[Frankennietzsche]

Blame it on Obama!

[Judge]

The new choice of chief executive of the NHS has been somewhat controversial. Simon Stevens was a bigwig in an American private healthcare company, UniversalHealth and during his time there fought long and hard to stop even a modest step towards universal healthcare. Now, whether or not universal healthcare should happen in the US is one matter (and one that we have debated, and should continue, to debate elsewhere) but can he be trusted with the NHS, or is this a cynical move by the government towards privatisation? Whilst there are problems with the NHS - not unlike any country's preferred system - I have yet to meet anyone who wants universal private healthcare in this country. Whilst his proposed salary of £189k amounts to a pay cut for him, it is still well in excess of the usual amount for chief public officials. Why?

Many have suggested that the chief executive of the NHS should be someone from within the system, who knows how it works and will seek to protect its interests. Healthcare (along with education, and I've got plenty of gripes about that which will follow) should not be a business and privatisation does not always lead to higher standards, and for evidence of that I gesture tiredly at our train system and our energy companies. Here are some interesting article about the appointment.



http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/po ... rnalSearch

"Will seek to protect its interests." There is your key phrase. Who's interest is that? The NHS or the citizens who receive services from the NHS?

We here in the US have yet to slip down that slope (and I've been in healthcare provision since 1980) but we are soon to join for better or worse. All I can say Mrs. Peel is to be wary and always skeptical of those who have your best interests at heart.

[Palinka (RIP)]

...for evidence of that I gesture tiredly at our train system...

Indeed, our train system, currently, is little more than licensed larceny. I shudder to think what will happen were a similar system to be applied to our National Health Service. It really is no wonder that Scotland (and, albeit to a lesser extent, Wales) is proposing seceding from the Union.