The NHS is not giving enough priority to diabetes

Astonishingly, this isn't about a lack of money.

As someone who has run NHS bodies and been an NHS groupie for more years than I care to think about, I wept with joy at the tribute to our health service in Danny Boyle’s breathtaking opening ceremony for the London Olympic Games. For me, those that work tirelessly for our health services are an even greater pride to Britain than our amazing athletes.

But as brilliant as those working in the NHS undoubtedly are, the sad fact is that as an institution it is failing when it comes to diabetes healthcare. Diabetes is one of the greatest health challenges we face but its rise seems to be inexorable and the seriousness with which it is tackled simply doesn’t match the seriousness of the condition and its complications.

There are now 3.7m people with diabetes in the UK and 7m at high risk and the fact that rates of devastating diabetes complications such as kidney failure and stroke are now at record levels is one of the reasons that 24,000 people with diabetes die early every year. To put it simply, diabetes is big a big, growing and serious problem to which insufficient priority is being given. 

The astounding thing is that it is not about money. How often are these words heard? Not often. The NHS already spends 10 per cent of its annual budget on diabetes – that £10bn is more than the total amount of money spent on the London Olympics over the last seven years. For this kind of investment, you would expect Jessica Ennis-esque levels of healthcare performance but much diabetes spending is going on the wrong things.

About 80 per cent of NHS spending on diabetes goes on treating the devastating diabetes complications, such as blindness, amputations and kidney disease, the vast majority of which are basically avoidable, while not enough is being done to prevent complications from occurring in the first place. For example, less than half of the people who should have been screened for diabetes under the NHS Vascular healthcheck have been. 

Risk assessment and early diagnosis are key to giving people treatment as early as possible that can help prevent complications developing or help them avoid developing diabetes if they are at high risk. Barely half of people with diabetes are getting the basic checks they need to manage their condition. Fixing both of these things could save the NHS Olympic scale cash through fewer hospital admissions and less complex treatments. It would also ensure that those with diabetes have a better quality of life and in many cases mean the difference between life and death.

As the London Olympics comes to a close I hope one of the lasting legacies of these games will be greater participation in sport and physical activity. Not only would this lead to better health and well-being for people across the country, but could also play a crucial role in reducing risk of Type 2 diabetes.  But if the growing problem of diabetes is to be truly tackled – and the ticking time bomb at the heart of the NHS defused – then we need the NHS and Government to declare and make diabetes a priority in the way that as a nation we prioritised the effective delivery of a wonderful Games. 

Barbara Young is chief executive of Diabetes UK

 

Barbara Young is chief executive of Diabetes UK.

Photo: Getty
Show Hide image

PMQs review: Jeremy Corbyn prompts Tory outrage as he blames Grenfell Tower fire on austerity

To Conservative cries of "shame on you!", the Labour leader warned that "we all pay a price in public safety" for spending cuts.

A fortnight after the Grenfell Tower fire erupted, the tragedy continues to cast a shadow over British politics. Rather than probing Theresa May on the DUP deal, Jeremy Corbyn asked a series of forensic questions on the incident, in which at least 79 people are confirmed to have died.

In the first PMQs of the new parliament, May revealed that the number of buildings that had failed fire safety tests had risen to 120 (a 100 per cent failure rate) and that the cladding used on Grenfell Tower was "non-compliant" with building regulations (Corbyn had asked whether it was "legal").

After several factual questions, the Labour leader rose to his political argument. To cries of "shame on you!" from Tory MPs, he warned that local authority cuts of 40 per cent meant "we all pay a price in public safety". Corbyn added: “What the tragedy of Grenfell Tower has exposed is the disastrous effects of austerity. The disregard for working-class communities, the terrible consequences of deregulation and cutting corners." Corbyn noted that 11,000 firefighters had been cut and that the public sector pay cap (which Labour has tabled a Queen's Speech amendment against) was hindering recruitment. "This disaster must be a wake-up call," he concluded.

But May, who fared better than many expected, had a ready retort. "The cladding of tower blocks did not start under this government, it did not start under the previous coalition governments, the cladding of tower blocks began under the Blair government," she said. “In 2005 it was a Labour government that introduced the regulatory reform fire safety order which changed the requirements to inspect a building on fire safety from the local fire authority to a 'responsible person'." In this regard, however, Corbyn's lack of frontbench experience is a virtue – no action by the last Labour government can be pinned on him. 

Whether or not the Conservatives accept the link between Grenfell and austerity, their reluctance to defend continued cuts shows an awareness of how politically vulnerable they have become (No10 has announced that the public sector pay cap is under review).

Though Tory MP Philip Davies accused May of having an "aversion" to policies "that might be popular with the public" (he demanded the abolition of the 0.7 per cent foreign aid target), there was little dissent from the backbenches – reflecting the new consensus that the Prime Minister is safe (in the absence of an attractive alternative).

And May, whose jokes sometimes fall painfully flat, was able to accuse Corbyn of saying "one thing to the many and another thing to the few" in reference to his alleged Trident comments to Glastonbury festival founder Michael Eavis. But the Labour leader, no longer looking fearfully over his shoulder, displayed his increased authority today. Though the Conservatives may jeer him, the lingering fear in Tory minds is that they and the country are on divergent paths. 

George Eaton is political editor of the New Statesman.

0800 7318496