Comparison 2006 against 1997 Labour Party Manifesto

Home ] Up ] The Campaign ] Petitions ] Events index ] Health Policy ] Democracy ] The NHS ] Talks Letters & Articles ] Contacts and Further Reading ]
 

The following table compares extracts on the NHS from the 1997 Labour Party Manifesto with the position and plans in 2006.  Many of the policies have failed or been reversed.

1997 Labour Party Manifesto Position and Plans in 2006

In health policy, we will safeguard the basic principles of the NHS, which we founded, but will not return to the top-down management of the 1970s. So we will keep the planning and provision of healthcare separate, but put planning on a longer-term, decentralised and more co-operative basis. The key is to root out unnecessary administrative cost, and to spend money on the right things - frontline care. Over the five years of a Labour government: We will rebuild the NHS, reducing spending on administration and increasing spending on patient care. We will save the NHS

Policy failed. Administrative costs have increased.  Management structures are reorganised every few years, so each local body achieves very little apart from implementing centrally determined policies.  Local accountability of NHS bodies is limited, and there is no local democratic decision making on decisions like closures of community hospitals.
Complex financial inter-relationships and centrally imposed contracts and policies have led to some (possibly a majority) of local NHS bodies being unable to sustain their current level of front line services within their budgets, even though resources allocated have increased substantially.
100,000 people off waiting lists Reductions in waiting lists were achieved.  In part this was through creation of surplus capacity in the extremely expensive Independent Sector Treatment Centres, some of whose surgeons have botched operations that have had to be redone or have left patients damaged.  In part the reduction in waiting was by manipulation of figures by staff in NHS trusts, with passive acceptance at strategic health authority level.
End the Tory internal market Policy reversed.  The internal market has evolved but is still an expensive bureaucracy distorting decisions at all levels. 
End waiting for cancer surgery Achieved, though there is a risk that progress will be lost as a result of service cuts affecting most of the country as a result of misdirected resources.
Tough quality targets for hospitals Waiting time targets have in part distorted priorities away from seriously ill patients and resulted in scarcity of emergency beds and long ambulance journeys for critically injured patients.  See Routine service failures.
Independent food standards agency The Food Standards Agency was established, though it has had to resist political pressure to suppress bad news.
New public health drive Dangerous when it has led to denial of treatment to people with supposedly unhealthy lifestyles.
Raise spending in real terms every year - and spend the money on patients not bureaucracy Spending has increased, and patients have benefited to some extent.  Some of the extra spending has been on surplus capacity, expensive contracts and increased bureaucracy, while mainstream services have been cut because of incompetent budgeting at national level

Labour created the NHS 50 years ago. It is under threat from the Conservatives. We want to save and modernise the NHS. But if the Conservatives are elected again there may well not be an NHS in five years' time - neither national nor comprehensive. Labour commits itself anew to the historic principle: that if you are ill or injured there will be a national health service there to help; and access to it will be based on need and need alone - not on your ability to pay, or on who your GP happens to be or on where you live.

There are contradictions in government policy.
The Choose and Book policy will when fully developed mean that patients will be able to go to any hospital in the country, at least for elective surgery.
The National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence is established to advise on which treatments should be used and which should not be used, but its research capacity was cut in 2005, causing a backlog, and some of its recommendations appear to be influenced more by the cost of a treatment than by its efficacy.
Policies of primary care trusts differ, and some limit access to treatments on arbitrary grounds (such as unhealthy lifestyles) or deny access to expensive new potentially life-saving treatments while they prioritise cutting waiting times for elective surgery for conditions that are inconvenient and/or painful but not life-threatening.
Postcode prescribing is still thriving.

In 1990 the Conservatives imposed on the NHS a complex internal market of hospitals competing to win contracts from health authorities and fundholding GPs. The result is an NHS strangled by costly red tape, with every individual transaction the subject of a separate invoice. After six years, bureaucracy swallows an extra £1.5 billion per year; there are 20,000 more managers and 50,000 fewer nurses on the wards; and more than one million people are on waiting lists. The government has consistently failed to meet even its own health targets. There can be no return to top-down management, but Labour will end the Conservatives' internal market in healthcare. The planning and provision of care are necessary and distinct functions, and will remain so. But under the Tories, the administrative costs of purchasing care have undermined provision and the market system has distorted clinical priorities. Labour will cut costs by removing the bureaucratic processes of the internal market.

The separation of commissioning and provision for acute and community services is costly and diverts resources from patient care.

Policy reversed.  The latest phase of the internal market is payment by results, with money following the patients.  The system is destabilising (liable to randomly shift deficits between acute trusts and primary care trusts, so that nobody knows the consolidated deficit and services to patients will be unnecessarily cut), open to manipulation and costly to administer.  The tariff for payment by results is substantially exceeded by contractual payments for Independent Sector Treatment Centres and unable to support the costs of hospitals funded through the private finance initiative,

The savings achieved will go on direct care for patients. As a start, the first £100 million saved will treat an extra 100,000 patients. Policy failed. No significant savings were achieved.  Extra resources have been allocated.   Much of the benefit has been lost by badly costed changes in contracts for NHS workers, creation of expensive surplus capacity in the private sector to reduce waiting times for elective surgery, and unnecessary changes in the management structures that can only have increased costs.  The effect on costs of new, more effective, but much more expensive treatments has been under-estimated.
We will end waiting for cancer surgery, thereby helping thousands of women waiting for breast cancer treatment. Achieved, though there is a risk that progress will be lost as a result of service cuts affecting most of the country as a result of misdirected resources.
Primary care will play a lead role. 

In recent years, GPs have gained power on behalf of their patients in a changed relationship with consultants, and we support this. But the development of GP fundholding has also brought disadvantages. Decision-making has been fragmented. Administrative costs have grown. And a two-tier service has resulted.   Labour will retain the lead role for primary care but remove the disadvantages that have come from the present system. GPs and nurses will take the lead in combining together locally to plan local health services more efficiently for all the patients in their area.

Policy failed. The primary care groups foreshadowed here were short-lived and replaced by larger primary care trusts, which in 2006 are due to be merged to boundaries similar to the pre-1997 health authorities - an expensive diversion of effort away from direct patient care.

It is dangerous to give any professional group too much power in the administration of the NHS.  See Sharon Wilson for where a primary care trust has colluded in the black-listing of a seriously ill patient whose complaints against various GPs have not been mutually resolved.

This will enable all GPs in an area to bring their combined strength to bear upon individual hospitals to secure higher standards of patient provision. In making this change, we will build on the existing collaborative schemes which already serve 14 million people. The current system of year-on-year contracts is costly and unstable. We will introduce three- to five-year agreements between the local primary care teams and hospitals. Hospitals will then be better able to plan work at full capacity and co-operate to enhance patient services. Policy reversed. The Choose and Book system will give patients choice of which hospitals or private clinics they use for elective surgery, so there will be no contractual commitment to send elective surgery patients to the local hospital and finances of hospital trusts will be destabilised.  At least patients will be able to choose the local hospital, where previous contracts may have been less convenient for people living in some areas.  In the Choose and Book system, local commissioning adds cost, complexity and inconsistent policies (postcode prescribing) to no benefit.
Higher-quality services for patients.

Hospitals will retain their autonomy over day-to-day administrative functions, but, as part of the NHS, they will be required to meet high-quality standards in the provision of care. Management will be held to account for performance levels.

The original star ratings ignored hospitals' relative quality of outcome and concentrated on secondary but more easily measured issues such as waiting times.  The ratings were unstable, and a hospital or other trust could move up or down the ratings by two stars in a single year, although it is unlikely that any hospital would improve or deteriorate so fast.  The new 2005 system of self-assessment at least has the advantage of encouraging hospitals to identify and correct their own weaknesses rather than dispute a rating by an outside body.
Boards will become more representative of the local communities they serve. Policy failed. No progress except in foundation trusts, which are inappropriate bodies for direct election because relatively few people have a long term relationship with an acute hospital.  It is the primary care trusts that should be directly elected and should control the acute hospitals etc.
A new patients' charter will concentrate on the quality and success of treatment. New patients' charter?  The Government has not produced one.  The Campaign for Health Service Democracy has prepared a statement of Citizen's rights in the NHS.
 The Tories' so-called 'Efficiency Index' counts the number of patient 'episodes', not the quality or success of treatment. With Labour, the measure will be quality of outcome, itself an incentive for effectiveness. To measure quality of outcome is difficult because the figures need to be weighted according to how ill patients were in the first instance.  There have been few official figures, but some weighted performance figures have been published, mainly in the press.  See Clinical Outcomes.
As part of our concern to ensure quality, we will work towards the elimination of mixed-sex wards. As old large wards are closed and replaced by wards consisting of smaller bays or single rooms, this will be a natural consequence.
Health authorities will become the guardians of high standards. They will monitor services, spread best practice and ensure rising standards of care. This role has gone to new bodies such as the Healthcare Commission.
Commissioning primary care trusts have accountability for standards with minimal influence to improve them.
The Tory attempt to use private money to build hospitals has failed to deliver. Labour will overcome the problems that have plagued the Private Finance Initiative, end the delays, sort out the confusion and develop new forms of public/private partnership that work better and protect the interests of the NHS. Policy failed.  Running costs of new hospitals financed through the Private Finance Initiative are unaffordable unless specially subsidised, and some schemes have been delayed or curtailed at a late stage for reason of unaffordability.
The Local Improvement Finance Trust (LIFT) has not the same problem because it is used for primary care, which is not under the same financial pressure.
Labour is opposed to the privatisation of clinical services which is being actively promoted by the Conservatives. Policy reversed. Elective surgery has been contracted to multi-national companies through Independent Sector Treatment Centres, which are expensive and sometimes incompetent, and have surplus capacity whose cost has diverted resources from treatments that are more clinically urgent.
Some primary care has been contracted to multi-national companies instead of the traditional local professional practices.
Labour will promote new developments in telemedicine - bringing expert advice from regional centres of excellence to neighbourhood level using new technology. NHS Direct is a quiet success,  though under-resourced and insufficiently publicised.
Patients actually needing to see a doctor out of hours have a great variety of arrangements across the country. often involving numerous telephone calls.
Good health

A new minister for public health will attack the root causes of ill health, and so improve lives and save the NHS money. Labour will set new goals for improving the overall health of the nation which recognise the impact that poverty, poor housing, unemployment and a polluted environment have on health.

Partial success.  Unhealthy lifestyles have not greatly changed, and improvement has been hampered by long term contracts to sell junk food at schools.  The impetus to change this was not from politicians but from a celebrity chef..
A pernicious move has been the threat, and sometimes the reality, of denial of NHS treatment to people with conditions that may have been caused by unhealthy lifestyles
Smoking is the greatest single cause of preventable illness and premature death in the UK. We will therefore ban tobacco advertising. Policy  compromised and delayed.  Tobacco sponsorship of Formula One motor racing was permitted for several years after lobbying by a former Labour Party donor.  This temporary exemption was extended to snooker.  Subsequently and after a faltering start legislation was brought forward to ban smoking in enclosed public places.
Labour will establish an independent food standards agency. The £3.5 billion BSE crisis and the E. coli outbreak which resulted in serious loss of life, have made unanswerable the case for the independent agency we have proposed. The Food Standards Agency was established, though it has had to resist political pressure to suppress bad news regarding the possible pollution of milk when animal carcases were being cremated out of doors during the recent outbreak of foot and mouth disease.  Progress in improving food labelling has been slow.
NHS spending

The Conservatives have wasted spending on the NHS. We will do better. We will raise spending on the NHS in real terms every year and put the money towards patient care. And a greater proportion of every pound spent will go on patient care not bureaucracy.

Policy failed.  Extra resources have been allocated, but  much of the benefit has been lost by badly costed changes in contracts for NHS workers, creation of expensive surplus capacity in the private sector to reduce waiting times for elective surgery, and unnecessary changes in the management structures that can only have increased costs.  The effect on costs of new, more effective, but much more expensive treatments has been under-estimated.
An NHS for the future

The NHS requires continuity as well as change, or the system cannot cope. There must be pilots to ensure that change works. And there must be flexibility, not rigid prescription, if innovation is to flourish. Our fundamental purpose is simple but hugely important: to restore the NHS as a public service working co-operatively for patients, not a commercial business driven by competition.

Policy reversed. Untried policies that have hastily been imposed throughout England include:
  • Independent Sector Treatment Centres
  • Choose and Book, with money following the patient according to an untested tariff, and unpredictable consequences in service cuts in some areas.
  • Primary care trusts replacing larger district health authorities.
  • Local medical and dental practices losing responsibility for out of hours care, with no evaluation of the cost to primary care trusts of making alternative provision.
  • Primary care trusts merged often to previous district health authority boundaries.

Home ] Government Health Policy ] Negative Proposals from Outside Government ] Positive proposals from outside government ] An Independent NHS ] International Health Policy ]

 Criticism ] Legislation on Health since Labour came into office ] Government Health Policy/Sources ] [ Comparison 2006 against 1997 Labour Party Manifesto ] National Plan for the NHS ] Patient and Public Involvement in Health ] NHS Standards ] Children's Services ] Public Health ] NHS Direct ] Foundation Hospitals ] Diagnostic and Treatment Centres ] Health Screening Programmes ] Patient Choice ] NHS Staffing ] Resources ] Private Sector Involvement ] Violence in Hospital ]

Sheila Porter-Williams
Campaign for Health Service Democracy
Green Haven, Halfway Lane
Dunchurch
Rugby, Warwickshire CV22 6RD
sheilaCHSD@porter-williams.freeserve.co.uk