NHS crisis: Politicians are not offering a comprehensive solution on how to fix the health service
The NHS is in the worst crisis in its 75 years, say health experts.
And you only had to listen to the heart-wrenching stories of the audience during a live Sky News programme on the NHS at Coventry Hospital for the reality of that to be laid bare.
There was James, whose wife died after waiting too long for an ambulance – and Sarah, whose mum died from an infection in hospital after waiting too long to be discharged into community care.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
‘NHS can survive if people fight for it’
Stories that provoked gasps of horror and expressions of distress from the audience, as those around them recounted how they lost loved ones in a health system on its knees.
And as the stories of failings were shared, the obvious question that followed was whether the NHS can survive in its current form, or if it needs a radical rethink.
This is of course an intensely political question, given that it is governments that decide how much investment should be put into the health system, sort out the infrastructure, and decide how it should be organised.
There is a growing discussion in Westminster about how the NHS should be funded, with the former health secretary Sajid Javid telling me last year that he doesn’t believe the NHS can survive and the country needs an “honest conversation” about how we pay for healthcare.
He thinks the UK should look to European neighbours that have a mix of private insurance and state provision, where patients pay some money for services. He recently said those who can afford it should also pay to see a GP.
But this wasn’t a view shared by our audience, with many shaking their heads when I reflected some of the political discussion back in Westminster around the future of the NHS.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
Sir Rod Stewart calls Sky News
As Phil Brown, a retired children’s nurse, said: “As Nye Bevan [the founder of the NHS] put it, the NHS will survive for as long as there are people even now who are prepared to fight for it.
“Give back an elective nurses council, take away the parking charges, give us a four-day week, we will graft… and watch what all NHS staff can do.”
The audience reflected wider public sentiment, according to Hugh Alderwick, director of policy at the Health Foundation.
“Polling shows strong support for the core principles of the NHS, including it being free at the point of use, available to all and predominantly funded through tax,” he said. “The public want a better health service, rather than a different system and they back additional spending to supply it, with 71% thinking greater government investment in the NHS is necessary.”
Read more special coverage:
NHS needs are long-term, complicated and challenging
Sir Rod Stewart calls in to live Sky News phone-in
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
Can the NHS survive?
But if the audience seemed to agree with the principle of an NHS free at the point of use and funded through taxation, the politicians are not offering comprehensive solutions to how to end a crisis that was beginning long before the COVID pandemic.
Chronic staff shortages, the need for more investment, a plan to fix adult social care and weak capital investment in buildings, equipment and IT, are some of the big problems facing the NHS but our politicians tend to deal in sticking plasters not real solutions.
The most obvious example being the ditching of Boris Johnson’s £12bn-a-year plan to better fund the NHS and social care through a National Insurance tax rise and a cap on individual care costs to protect the elderly from exorbitant costs.
That successive government inaction now hitting home with ambulance delays, bed blocking and high levels of unmet needs.
But on both sides of the political divide, parties are for now unwilling to grasp the nettle.
Read more special coverage:
Proposals to make some NHS patients pay for care spark backlash
Where – and why – there are long waits for emergency care
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
‘NHS Crisis: Your Say’ Highlights
The Conservatives have delayed social care reform until after the next general election. They have promised a plan on improving emergency care, access and workforce to deal with acute staffing shortages, but there is a private admission within government that it is unlikely that patients will feel much improvement in services before an election and there is certainly no talk of increased investment.
Labour too is unwilling to commit to more funding, anxious that they open up a line of attack from the Conservatives if it commits to spending plans for the NHS.
As deputy leader Angela Rayner put it to me in a recent interview, Labour will focus on reforming the NHS – a big push on changing the way GP surgeries work and increasing preventative medicine – rather than raising taxes to pay for it.
The “retail offer” from Labour is to pay for more doctors and nurses by scrapping non-dom tax status and funnelling the estimated £3.2bn that will raise into extra training places.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
An NHS hospital under pressure
Lord Winston, the IVF pioneer who has worked in the NHS for nearly six decades, told me last week he had never seen it so bad and said he believed more funding would be inevitable. He urged Sir Keir Starmer to show more “courage” when it came to resolving the problems of the NHS.
With an election less than two years away, political leaders are for now playing it safe with difficult decisions delayed. But what was clear from our discussion is that voters want the NHS to survive in its current form. And they will expect their political leaders to deliver it.
World
Body of missing rabbi Zvi Kogan found in UAE – as Israeli PM says he was murdered in ‘antisemitic terror incident’
The COP29 climate talks have reached a last ditch deal on cash for developing countries, pulling the summit back from the brink of collapse after a group of countries stormed out of a negotiating room earlier.
The slew of deals finally signed off in the small hours of Sunday morning in Azerbaijan includes one that proved hardest of all – one about money.
Eventually the more than 190 countries in Baku agreed a target for richer polluting countries such as the UK, EU and Japan to drum up $300bn a year by 2035 to help poorer nations both curb and adapt to climate change.
It is a far cry from the $1.3trn experts say is needed, and from the $500bn that vulnerable countries like Uganda had said they would be willing to accept.
But in the end they were forced to, knowing they could not afford to live without it, nor wait until next year to try again, when a Donald Trump presidency would make things even harder.
Bolivia’s lead negotiator Diego Pacheco called it an “insult”, while the Marshall Islands’ Tina Stege said it was “not nearly enough, but it’s a start”.
UN climate chief Simon Stiell said: “This new finance goal is an insurance policy for humanity, amid worsening climate impacts hitting every country.
“No country got everything they wanted, and we leave Baku with a mountain of work still to do. So this is no time for victory laps.”
The funding deal was clinched more than 24 hours into overtime, and against what felt like all the odds.
The talks were rocked from the start by the incoming presidency of climate denier Mr Trump, the moment Argentina’s team were recalled back to Buenos Aires by their right-wing president and a controversial letter that sent shockwaves through the United Nations.
Pic: AP
The fraught two weeks of negotiations pitted the anger of developing countries who are footing the bill for more dangerous weather that they did little to cause, against the tight public finances of rich countries.
A relieved Juan Carlos Monterrey Gomez, climate envoy for Panama, said there is “light at the end of the tunnel”.
Just hours ago, the talks almost fell apart as furious vulnerable nations stormed out of negotiations in frustration over that elusive funding goal.
They were also angry with oil and gas producing countries, who stood accused of trying to dilute aspects of the deal on cutting fossil fuels.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
Climate-vulnerable nations storm out of talks
The UN talks work on consensus, meaning everyone has to agree for a deal to fly.
A row over how to follow up on last year’s pledge to “transition away from fossil fuels” was left unresolved and punted into next year, following objections from Chile and Switzerland for being too weak.
A draft deal simply “reaffirmed” the commitment but did not dial up the pressure in the way the UK, EU, island states and many others here wanted.
Saudi Arabia fought the hardest against any step forward on cutting fossil fuels, the primary cause of climate change that is intensifying floods, drought and fires around the world.
Governments did manage to strike a deal on carbon markets at COP29, which has been 10 years in the making and will allow countries to trade emissions cuts.
‘Not everything we wanted’
👉 Tap here to follow the Sky News Daily wherever you get your podcasts 👈
The UK’s energy secretary, Ed Miliband, said the deal is “not everything we or others wanted”, but described it as a “step forward”.
“It’s a deal that will drive forward the clean energy transition, which is essential for jobs and growth in Britain and for protecting us all against the worsening climate crisis,” he added.
“Today’s agreement sends the signal that the clean energy transition is unstoppable.
“It is the biggest economic opportunity of the 21st century and through our championing of it we can help crowd in private investment.”
Protesters at the summit in Baku. Pic: AP
Read more:
Azerbaijan president hails oil and gas as ‘gift from God’
UN climate summits ‘no longer fit for purpose’
The Azerbaijan team leading COP29 said: “Every hour of the day, we have pulled people together. Every inch of the way, we have pushed for the highest common denominator.
“We have faced geopolitical headwinds and made every effort to be an honest broker for all sides.”
At least 20 people have been killed and 66 injured in Israeli strikes on central Beirut, Lebanese authorities have said.
Lebanon‘s health ministry said the death toll could rise as emergency workers dig through the rubble looking for survivors. DNA tests are being used to identify the victims, the ministry added.
The attack destroyed an eight-storey residential building and badly damaged several others around it in the Basta neighbourhood at 4am (2am UK time) on Saturday.
The central Basta neighbourhood in Beirut
The Israeli military did not warn residents to evacuate before the attack and has not commented on the casualties.
At least four bombs were dropped in the attack – the fourth targeting the city centre this week.
A separate drone strike in the southern port city of Tyre this morning killed two people and injured three, according to the state-run National News Agency.
The victims were Palestinian refugees from the nearby al Rashidieh camp who were out fishing, according to Mohammed Bikai, spokesperson for the Fatah Palestinian faction in the Tyre area.
Israel’s military warned residents today in parts of Beirut’s southern suburbs that they were near Hezbollah facilities, which the army would target in the near future. The warning, posted on X, told people to evacuate at least 500 metres away.
The army said that over the past day it had conducted intelligence-based strikes on Hezbollah targets in Dahiyeh, in Beirut’s southern suburbs, where Hezbollah has a strong presence. It said it hit several command centres and weapons storage facilities.
Pic: AP
Israel has killed several Hezbollah leaders in air strikes on the capital’s southern suburbs.
Heavy fighting between Israel and Hezbollah is ongoing in southern Lebanon, as Israeli forces push deeper into the country since launching a major offensive in September.
According to the Lebanese health ministry, at least 3,670 people have been killed in Israeli attacks there, with more than 15,400 wounded.
It has displaced about 1.2 million people – a quarter of Lebanon’s population – while Israel says about 90 soldiers and nearly 50 civilians have been killed in northern Israel.
Read more:
No 10 indicates Netanyahu would be arrested
‘Dozens’ of Palestinians killed in Israeli airstrike
Meanwhile, six people, including three children and two women, were killed in the southern Gazan city of Khan Younis.
Some 44,176 Palestinians have been killed since the start of Israel’s military campaign in Gaza, according to the Gaza health ministry.
The ministry does not distinguish between civilians and combatants in its count, but it has said that more than half of the fatalities are women and children.
The war began when Hamas-led militants stormed into southern Israel on 7 October 2023, killing some 1,200 people and taking another 250 hostage.
US envoy Amos Hochstein was in the region this week to try to end more than 13 months of fighting between Israel and Hezbollah, ignited last October by the war in Gaza.
Mr Hochstein indicated progress had been made after meetings in Beirut on Tuesday and Wednesday, before going to meet Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and defence minister Israel Katz.
-
Sports2 years ago‘Storybook stuff’: Inside the night Bryce Harper sent the Phillies to the World Series
-
Sports8 months agoStory injured on diving stop, exits Red Sox game
-
Sports2 years agoMLB Rank 2023: Ranking baseball’s top 100 players
-
Sports1 year agoGame 1 of WS least-watched in recorded history
-
Sports3 years ago
Team Europe easily wins 4th straight Laver Cup
-
Environment2 years agoJapan and South Korea have a lot at stake in a free and open South China Sea
-
Environment2 years agoGame-changing Lectric XPedition launched as affordable electric cargo bike
-
Business2 years agoBank of England’s extraordinary response to government policy is almost unthinkable | Ed Conway