There are lies, damn, lies and statistics,
NHS Performance.
The Chief Executive of the NHS, Sir Nigel Crisp, published a report on the performance of the NHS on Friday 7 May 2004. He gave a very upbeat commentary on the report, saying that the NHS had achieved a †œsustained turnaroundââ ¬Â which was †œacceleratingÃà ‚¢Ã¢â€šÂ¬Ã‚ ÂÂ. His conclusion was that the NHS had used the large spending increases begun in 1999-2000 to †œgood effectÃƒÂ¢Ã¢â€šà ¬Ã‚ÂÂ. He pointed to:
- †œDramatic falls in waiting times."
- †œPremature death rates from the major diseases are falling quickly.ââ‚ ‚¬Ã‚ÂÂ
- †œMore staff have been recruited.ââ ¬ÂÂÂ
- †œVery big changes in how services are delivered.ââ ¬ÂÂÂ
- †œImprovements in quality and productivity.â↚¬ÂÂÂ
In fact this presentation is the most positive version of the results. Given that spending on the NHS has increased by 40 per cent in real terms in just five years, some improvements are to be expected. But improvements have solely come about because the taxpayer is putting in more resources, not because of the effectiveness of NHS managers in managing resources efficiently.
The concern is that the
speed of the rises is resulting in inefficiencies, the scale
does not represent value for money, and the NHS at these higher levels of funding is
not performing at international standards. Repeated annual spending increases of £5 - £6 billion
have not improved average waiting times, nor mortality rates of cancer and heart disease. Most importantly, other countries deliver superior healthcare for similar levels of resource.
Spending without reform may enable sensitive political targets to be hit but will not deliver an efficient, world class health service in the long term.
__________________
Actually, the doctors themselves say the waiting list times are being.
doctored