Purchase today

Enter your email address here to receive updates from the team.

Jobs

User login

The Staggers

The New Statesman’s rolling politics blog

RSS

The pressure rises on Andrew Lansley

The Health Secretary failed to rebut the charge that his reforms are "a disruption and a distraction

By George Eaton Published 24 January 2012 11:37

The coalition's decision to embark on the biggest reorganisation of the NHS in its history always sat uneasily with the need for the service to make record efficiency savings of £20bn. Indeed, the project was once succinctly described by the British Medical Journal as "mad". Now, the health select committee, chaired by the former Conservative health secretary Stephen Dorrell, has warned that the reforms are acting as a "disruption and distraction" and are hindering the NHS's ability to make savings. The committee argues that the health service is relying on short-term cuts and "salami-slicing" to save money, instead of re-thinking the way care is delivered. It all sounds much like the "perfect storm" that Hamish Meldrum, the head of the British Medical Association, spoke of in his interview with NS editor Jason Cowley in this week's magazine.

"It is self-defeating to cut services for patients in order to then re-invest to improve them", an anxious-sounding Andrew Lansley declared on the Today programme this morning (see below). But that is exactly what the Health Secretary stands accused of doing. Moreover, he failed to rebut the central charge that his reforms are undermining the NHS's attempt to save £4bn a year.

David Cameron worked hard in opposition to convince the public that the Conservatives could be trusted with the NHS but it has become one of the biggest headaches for his government. Lansley's chaotic reforms have destroyed Cameron's ambition to depoliticise the issue. As Lord Ashcroft recently observed in his report Project Blueprint: Winning a Conservative majority in 2015, "nobody seemed to know why the reforms were needed and how, even in theory, they were supposed to improve things for patients." Just 20 per cent of voters believe that the NHS is "safe in David Cameron's hands" and Labour has established a 12-point lead over the Tories on health policy.

So, as Lenin asked, what is to be done? Lansley's opponents are determined to see the bill dropped but the widely-respected Dorrell insisted on Today that it was too late to go back. A dramatic U-turn would cause even more disruption, he suggested.

Lansley's own future is less certain. The Health Secretary has failed in the eyes of NHS staff and increasingly lacks the political authority needed to explain and defend the reforms. Should Chris Huhne's legal travails force Cameron to reshuffle his cabinet, he may well take an opportunity to move the discredited Lansley.

Special Offer: Get 12 issues of New Statesman magazine for just £12

Tags: NHS

More from George Eaton

View the discussion thread.

9 comments

Thu, 2012-07-19 13:42 — mzaryta (not verified)

anim3snipe
sadt3ars
animeonlye
nsf7
3solat
mnoms
magicians4all
animexyt
mexyt
delegnet

Wed, 2012-07-18 01:07 — hesham15 (not verified)

anim3snipe
sadt3ars
animeonlye
nsf7
3sola
mnoms
magicians4all
animexyt
mexyt
delegnet

Tue, 2012-01-24 13:49 — representingthemambo (not verified)

Isn't it depressing that Dorrell knows the reforms are appalling but yet he says they can't now be reversed. Why?

Sounds like a massive cop-out to me.......

http://representingthemambo.wordpress.com/

Tue, 2012-01-24 14:50 — Kippers

I was fairly sure that this would happen. I was fairly sure that someone would eventually admit that the reforms would cause chaos but would claim that it was too late to turn back as this would cause even more chaos.

This is of course rubbish. None of the reforms have been approved so no changes should have been made. Where changes have been made, it has been done by pressurising PCTs by claiming that it was inevitable that the Bill would be passed. Any changes made should be reversed and the costs passed on to those who jumped the gun.

Lansley and Cameron have tried to railroad this Bill through by pressurising PCTs (and others) to make reforms before they had been legislated for. There is no reason why this should be accepted. They are the ones who should pay.

Tue, 2012-01-24 14:57 — JacquesOuze

Landsley has locked himself firmly on a single course. He cannot be seen to deviate now or he would be finished, so he will soldier on until removed by Cameron. The only questions are when, how much damage has been done and which Tory neddy gets the job next. My guess is that Cameron will continue to back Lansley until the wheels really start coming off the NHS in 2013 and we reach some sort of crisis. Cameron is also stuck in a tight spot of his own makeing. Having put Lansley in place and backed him through last years pause in the bill, he can't now cut him loose without it looking like catastrophic errors of judgement on his part too.

Tue, 2012-01-24 16:46 — Mizar (not verified)

On planet Lansley, everthing is lovely.

Tue, 2012-01-24 17:08 — Daniel (not verified)

All this talk of 'oh we can't stop it now' is bull. It hasn't even been approved by Parliament yet so you have to question why have the changes have already been implemented.

Just like when you build a house without planning permission - when the council says it has to be demolished it has to be demolished. It doesn't matter how complete the house is or how long people have been living there. Rules are rules, if you try to circumvent them and get found out you just have to hold your hands up and say 'it's a fair cop'.

The present PCT clusters can stay for the time being. The jumped-up GPs who think they are the masters of the universe can get back in their box that is their surgery and start seeing patients like what they are paid to do (and paid well may I add). From my experience the sort of GPs that want to run the NHS are the last people you want running the NHS!

Tue, 2012-01-24 18:02 — Silican (not verified)

The sort of GPs that want to run the NHS are the last people you want to see as doctors. GPs who go into management are, in my experience, people who should not have been doctors in the first place or who have failed miserably when they tried to play the part. Real doctors care about their patients not about their power.

Tue, 2012-01-24 18:11 — Kippers

"From my experience the sort of GPs that want to run the NHS are the last people you want running the NHS!"

Quite. I was just looking at the interests of GPs and others who are on the highest number of committees, and they all seem to also spend a lot of time networking with drugs and hospital supply companies.

"All this talk of 'oh we can't stop it now' is bull. It hasn't even been approved by Parliament yet so you have to question why have the changes have already been implemented."

Precisely. Changes have been implemented before they are legislated for, precisely to try to create some momentum and to make people think that the reform is inevitable (and to allow people like Dorrell to wring his hands about the chaos but then vote for the Bill).

If no-one knows what the objective of the Bill is, then the correct course is to stop it. If reforms have been implemented before legislation has been passed, those involved should be sacked and surcharged.