NHS funding could be linked to patient feedback under new plans, with poorly performing services that “don’t listen” penalised with less money.

As part of the “10 Year Health Plan” to be unveiled next week, a new scheme will be trialled that will see patients asked to rate the service they received – and if they feel it should get a funding boost or not.

It will be introduced first for services that have a track record of very poor performance and where there is evidence of patients “not being listened to”, the government said.

This will create a “powerful incentive for services to listen to feedback and improve patients’ experience”, it added.

Sky News understands that it will not mean bonuses or pay increases for the best performing staff.

NHS payment mechanisms will also be reformed to reward services that keep patients out of hospital as part of a new ‘Year of Care Payments’ initiative and the government’s wider plan for change.

Speaking to The Times, chief executive of the NHS Confederation Matthew Taylor expressed concerns about the trial.

He told the newspaper: “Patient experience is determined by far more than their individual interaction with the clinician and so, unless this is very carefully designed and evaluated, there is a risk that providers could be penalised for more systemic issues, such as constraints around staffing or estates, that are beyond their immediate control to fix.”

He said that NHS leaders would be keen to “understand more about the proposal”, because elements were “concerning”.

Read more from Sky News
Amber health heat alert issued
Patient died ‘unexpectedly’ after NHS cyber attack
Doctors told to stop using unapproved AI

Health Secretary Wes Streeting said: “We will reward great patient care, so patient experience and clinical excellence are met with extra cash. These reforms are key to keeping people healthy and out of hospital, and to making the NHS sustainable for the long-term as part of the Plan for Change.”

In the raft of announcements in the 10 Year Health Plan, the government has said 201 bodies responsible for overseeing and running parts of the NHS in England – known as quangos – will be scrapped.

These include Healthwatch England, set up in 2012 to speak out on behalf of NHS and social care patients, the National Guardian’s Office, created in 2015 to support NHS whistleblowers, and the Health Services Safety Investigations Body (HSSIB).

The head of the Royal College of Nursing described the move as “so unsafe for patients right now”.

Professor Nicola Ranger said: “Today, in hospitals across the NHS, we know one nurse can be left caring for 10, 15 or more patients at a time. It’s not safe. It’s not effective. And it’s not acceptable.

“For these proposed changes to be effective, government must take ownership of the real issue, the staffing crisis on our wards, and not just shuffle people into new roles. Protecting patients has to be the priority and not just a drive for efficiency.”

Elsewhere, the new head of NHS England Sir Jim Mackey said key parts of the NHS appear “built to keep the public away because it’s an inconvenience”.

“We’ve made it really hard, and we’ve probably all been on the end of it,” he told the Daily Telegraph.

“The ward clerk only works nine to five, or they’re busy doing other stuff; the GP practice scrambles every morning.”

Thousands of people have taken to the streets in Tehran to mourn top military commanders, nuclear scientists and others killed in Iran’s 12-day war with Israel.

Iran’s state-run Press TV said the event – dubbed the “funeral procession of the Martyrs of Power” – was held for a total of 60 people, including four women and four children.

Follow live: Iran hits out at Trump’s ‘unacceptable’ remarks

It said at least 16 scientists and 10 senior commanders were among the dead, including the head of the Revolutionary Guard General Hossein Salami and the head of the guard’s ballistic missile programme, General Amir Ali Hajizadeh.

Their coffins were driven on trucks into the Iranian capital’s Azadi Square adorned with their pictures as well as rose petals and flowers, as crowds waved Iranian flags.

Mourners dressed in black, while chants of “death to America” and “death to Israel” could be heard.

Attending the funeral were Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian and other senior figures, including Ali Shamkhani who was seriously wounded during the conflict and is an adviser to Iran‘s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

There was no immediate sign of the supreme leader in the state broadcast of the funeral.

Israel, the only Middle Eastern country widely believed to have nuclear weapons, said its war against Iran aimed to prevent Tehran from developing its own nuclear weapons.

The US launched strikes on three nuclear enrichment sites in Iran, which Donald Trump said left them “obilterated”.

The Iranian government denies having a nuclear weapons programme and the UN nuclear watchdog, which carries out inspections in Iran, has said it has “no credible indication” of an active, coordinated weapons programme in the country.

Over the almost two weeks of fighting, Israel claimed it killed around 30 Iranian commanders and 11 nuclear scientists, before a ceasefire went into effect on Tuesday.

Read more from Sky News:
Truth about success of US airstrikes on Iran lies deep underground
Fury of helicopter crash victim’s son over documents ‘sealed for 100 years’

Follow The World

Listen to The World with Richard Engel and Yalda Hakim every Wednesday

Tap to follow

According to Iranian health ministry figures, 610 people were killed on the Iranian side, 13 of whom were children and 49 were women.

Israel’s health ministry said 28 people were killed in Israel and 3,238 injured.

As the president himself said, this was a “giant” of a decision – a significant moment to end a week of whiplash-inducing news.

The decision by the US Supreme Court is a big win for President Donald Trump.

By a majority of 6-3, the highest court in the land has ruled that federal judges have been overreaching in their authority by blocking or freezing the executive orders issued by the president.

Over the last few months, a series of presidential actions by Trump have been blocked by injunctions issued by federal district judges.

The federal judges, branded “radical leftist lunatics” by the president, have ruled on numerous individual cases, most involving immigration.

They have then applied their rulings as nationwide injunctions – thus blocking the Trump administration’s policies.

“It was a grave threat to democracy frankly,” the president said at a hastily arranged news conference in the White House briefing room.

“Instead of merely ruling on the immediate case before them, these judges have attempted to dictate the law for the entire nation,” he said.

In simple terms, this ruling – from a Supreme Court weighted towards conservative judges – frees up the president to push on with his agenda, less opposed by the courts.

“This is such a big day,” the president said.

“It gives power back to people that should have it, including Congress, including the presidency, and it only takes bad power away from judges. It takes bad power, sick power and unfair power.

“And it’s really going to be… a very monumental decision.”

The country’s most senior member of the Democratic Party was to the point with his reaction to the ruling.

Senate minority leader Chuck Schumer called it “an unprecedented and terrifying step toward authoritarianism, a grave danger to our democracy, and a predictable move from this extremist MAGA court”.

In a statement, Schumer wrote: “By weakening the power of district courts to check the presidency, the court is not defending the constitution – it’s defacing it.

“This ruling hands Donald Trump yet another green light in his crusade to unravel the foundations of American democracy.”

Federal power in the US is, constitutionally, split equally between the three branches of government – the executive branch (the presidency), the legislative branch (Congress) and the judiciary (the Supreme Court and other federal courts).

They are designed to ensure a separation of power and to ensure that no single branch becomes too powerful.

This ruling was prompted by a case brought over an executive order issued by President Trump on his inauguration day to end birthright citizenship – that constitutional right to be an American citizen if born here.

A federal judge froze the decision, ruling it to be in defiance of the 14th amendment of the constitution.

The Supreme Court has deferred its judgment on this particular case, instead ruling more broadly on the powers of the federal judges.

The court was divided along ideological lines, with conservatives in the majority and liberals in dissent.

👉 Follow Trump100 on your podcast app 👈

In her dissent, liberal Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson wrote: “​​As I understand the concern, in this clash over the respective powers of two coordinate branches of government, the majority sees a power grab – but not by a presumably lawless executive choosing to act in a manner that flouts the plain text of the constitution.

“Instead, to the majority, the power-hungry actors are… (wait for it)… the district courts.”

Another liberal Justice, Sonia Sotomayor, described the majority ruling by her fellow justices as: “Nothing less than an open invitation for the government to bypass the constitution.”

Conservative Justice Amy Coney Barrett, who Trump appointed during his first term, shifting the balance of left-right power in the court, led this particular ruling.

Writing for the majority, she said: “When a court concludes that the executive branch has acted unlawfully, the answer is not for the court to exceed its power, too.”

Follow The World

Listen to The World with Richard Engel and Yalda Hakim every Wednesday

Tap to follow

The focus now for those who deplore this decision will be to apply ‘class action’ – to file lawsuits on behalf of a large group of people rather than applying a single case to the whole nation.

There is no question though that the president and his team will feel significantly emboldened to push through their policy agenda with fewer blocks and barriers.

Read more from Sky News:
DR Congo and Rwanda sign US-brokered peace deal
‘Life-changing’ drug for teenager who lost mother to genetic condition

The ruling ends a giddy week for the president.

Last Saturday he ordered the US military to bomb Iran’s nuclear sites. Within two days he had forced both Israel and Iran to a ceasefire.

By mid-week he was in The Hague for the NATO summit where the alliance members had agreed to his defence spending demands.

At an Oval Office event late on Friday, where he presided over the signing of a peace agreement between the Democratic Republic of Congo and Rwanda, he also hinted at a possible ceasefire “within a week” in Gaza.

A truly consequential week seems set to be followed by another.