The Lib Dems and Tories have similar plans for the NHS. Photo: Getty
Show Hide image

What does the Lib Dems' NHS funding pledge mean for the general election?

£8bn by 2020.

As Labour hammers its opponents on the NHS, and the government attempts to play down the drastic effect of pressures on emergency departments, the Lib Dems enter the electoral fray with their funding promise for the health service: £8bn extra in real terms a year by 2020.

It is a direct response to NHS England and other health bodies' warning that health spending will need to increase by £8bn annually as part of a five-year plan: the Five Year Forward View published by the chief executive of NHS England, Simon Stevens.

This is a clever move by the Lib Dems, as it positions them as the only party directly promising what the NHS claims it needs to carry on. On top of this, the Lib Dems appear to be the only party promising to expand the health service's horizons and focus, with their proposals for mental health to be approached with the same gravity as physical health is treated. Its "red line" manifesto pledge is to equalise waiting times and implement funding especially for mental healthcare.

However, where Nick Clegg falls down is in how he will pay for this proposed increase in health spending. Here are the Lib Dems' plans:

   - We will baseline into the budget of the NHS, the additional £2bn
   that the Liberal Democrats successfully secured in the Autumn Statement for
   2015/16.

   - In addition to this funding, as we set out at our autumn
   conference, we will invest a further £1bn in real terms in 2016/17, which
   will then also be baselined. This will be paid for by capping pensions tax
   relief for the very wealthiest (saving £500m); aligning dividend tax with
   income tax for those earning over £150,000 (saving £400m); and scrapping
   the Conservative shares for rights scheme (saving £100m).

   - Once we have finished the job of tackling the deficit in 2017/18,
   we will increase health spending in line with growth in the economy.

These are hardly new, positive measures for raising funds, and the idea of scrapping a Tory scheme doesn't quite wash, considering the likelihood of the party going back into coalition with the Conservatives. It also opens the Lib Dems up for criticism from Labour, which is ever vigilant in its condemnation of other parties' plans to fund the NHS. The shadow health secretary, Andy Burnham, responded to Nick Clegg's plans with the same criticism he levelled at the Tories: 

Nick Clegg has copied the Tories at reannouncing money from within the NHS. Labour's fully funded plan will invest an extra £2.5bn each year in the NHS to recruit a new workforce, including 20,000 more nurses and 8,000 GPs.

You can’t trust a word the Lib Dems say and more empty promises from Nick Clegg are the last thing the NHS needs. After backing David Cameron’s NHS reorganisation and privatisation plans to the hilt, the public will not believe a word of this unfunded policy.

And indeed, the Lib Dems' plan is more similar to that of the Tories than of Labour, in spite of Labour planning to use an originally Lib Dem policy – the mansion tax – to boost the health budget. This is another example of why another Conservative/Lib Dem coalition could be more workable than if the Lib Dems come to having to work with Labour. It is also useful for Labour, which can gain political capital from lumping the Lib Dems in with the Tories on their attitude to the NHS.

Anoosh Chakelian is senior writer at the New Statesman.

How Jim Murphy's mistake cost Labour - and helped make Ruth Davidson

Scottish Labour's former leader's great mistake was to run away from Labour's Scottish referendum, not on it.

The strange revival of Conservative Scotland? Another poll from north of the border, this time from the Times and YouGov, shows the Tories experiencing a revival in Scotland, up to 28 per cent of the vote, enough to net seven extra seats from the SNP.

Adding to the Nationalists’ misery, according to the same poll, they would lose East Dunbartonshire to the Liberal Democrats, reducing their strength in the Commons to a still-formidable 47 seats.

It could be worse than the polls suggest, however. In the elections to the Scottish Parliament last year, parties which backed a No vote in the referendum did better in the first-past-the-post seats than the polls would have suggested – thanks to tactical voting by No voters, who backed whichever party had the best chance of beating the SNP.

The strategic insight of Ruth Davidson, the Conservative leader in Scotland, was to to recast her party as the loudest defender of the Union between Scotland and the rest of the United Kingdom. She has absorbed large chunks of that vote from the Liberal Democrats and Labour, but, paradoxically, at the Holyrood elections at least, the “Unionist coalition” she assembled helped those parties even though it cost the vote share.

The big thing to watch is not just where the parties of the Union make gains, but where they successfully form strong second-places against whoever the strongest pro-Union party is.

Davidson’s popularity and eye for a good photo opportunity – which came first is an interesting question – mean that the natural benefactor in most places will likely be the Tories.

But it could have been very different. The first politician to hit successfully upon the “last defender of the Union” routine was Ian Murray, the last Labour MP in Scotland, who squeezed both the  Liberal Democrat and Conservative vote in his seat of Edinburgh South.

His then-leader in Scotland, Jim Murphy, had a different idea. He fought the election in 2015 to the SNP’s left, with the slogan of “Whether you’re Yes, or No, the Tories have got to go”.  There were a couple of problems with that approach, as one  former staffer put it: “Firstly, the SNP weren’t going to put the Tories in, and everyone knew it. Secondly, no-one but us wanted to move on [from the referendum]”.

Then again under different leadership, this time under Kezia Dugdale, Scottish Labour once again fought a campaign explicitly to the left of the SNP, promising to increase taxation to blunt cuts devolved from Westminster, and an agnostic position on the referendum. Dugdale said she’d be open to voting to leave the United Kingdom if Britain left the European Union. Senior Scottish Labour figures flirted with the idea that the party might be neutral in a forthcoming election. Once again, the party tried to move on – but no-one else wanted to move on.

How different things might be if instead of running away from their referendum campaign, Jim Murphy had run towards it in 2015. 

Stephen Bush is special correspondent at the New Statesman. His daily briefing, Morning Call, provides a quick and essential guide to British politics.

0800 7318496