Health Policy Debate
16-17 June 2005
Preface
So close to the events of Thursday 7th July it feels a little strange to be writing about the politics and tensions of health policy. But as the day itself shows, the context we live within can change quickly and from the second half of June and mid-July – 7/7 aside – the tone of health policy changed quite a lot.
It is difficult to ignore the events of the 7th as they are so close to front of our minds and before outlining policy debate over this last month, I would like to make a personal observation, from the perspective of a BMA staff member.
Working with doctors to provide information and analysis, it is easy to see them primarily as politicians with an overriding interest in medicine and health. On the 7th, we saw them as doctors. From a personal perspective, their actions make me very proud to work for the BMA.
Introduction
In the second half of June, when the events of the 7th didn’t seem possible, the NHS Confederation held its annual conference. The ARM brought doctors together in Manchester, the LMC conference brought them to London, and the Royal College of Physicians invited 80 people to Cambridge on June 24th to discuss 10 propositions generated by their working group on professionalism.
In mid-June, the key message from the Confederation conference was to call on government to provide a coherent narrative explaining how current policy – now referred to collectively as “system reform”, with markets, tariffs, competition and the like - will actually lead to better health services. Dame Gill Morgan asked, “If we as managers can’t understand it, then how can we explain it to staff?” A simmering theme at the Confederation conference came to the boil at the ARM. It was that politicians should stop marginalising and ignoring the views of experienced professionals who care about the direction of policy and stop dismissing informed critique as self-interested opposition. The government need to work with professionals to make reform work and alter policy to limit negative consequences.