Skip to main content

Chancellor meddling in NHS pay process. BMA reaction to budget



Commenting on the statements on public sector pay in today’s Budget, Dr Mark Porter, Chair of BMA Council, said:

“We’re concerned that the Chancellor is seeking to meddle in NHS pay processes. As MPs noted this week, pay restraint cannot be seen as a long term savings strategy for the NHS. Efficiency gains will be achieved by focusing on quality, not by suppressing pay.

“Healthcare workers are at the forefront of the drive to improve efficiency in the NHS. They have already undergone major changes to their pensions, and many doctors have been subject to real terms pay cuts for several years. Pay progression is not automatic for most senior doctors.

Commenting on the Chancellor’s confirmation that NHS funding will continue to be protected, Dr Porter said:

“We welcome the fact that the Government continues to recognise the importance of the NHS, and the scale of cost inflation in healthcare. However, it is not the case that health has been exempted from the financial pressures facing the rest of the public sector. The NHS has been asked to deliver cost savings of £20 billion by 2015. Posts are being cut and services are being rationed.”

Commenting on the announcement of a reduction in duty on beer, Dr Vivienne Nathanson, the BMA’s Director of Professional Activities, said:

“We’re getting mixed messages from the Government about its commitment to tackling the harm caused by alcohol misuse. On one hand the Prime Minister says he wants to crack down on cheap alcohol, and on the other the Chancellor announces a penny less on beer. “The success of the Government’s alcohol strategy for England and Wales will be undermined if cheap booze continues to be available. We urge the Government to demonstrate that it is committed to tackling alcohol misuse and introduce a minimum unit price.”

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Prioritising people in nursing care.

There has been in recent years concern that care in the NHS has not been sufficiently 'patient centred', or responsive to the needs of the patient on a case basis. It has been felt in care that it as been the patient who has had to adapt to the regime of care, rather than the other way around. Putting patients at the centre of care means being responsive to their needs and supporting them through the process of health care delivery.  Patients should not become identikit sausages in a production line. The nurses body, the Nursing and Midwifery Council has responded to this challenge with a revised code of practice reflection get changes in health and social care since the previous code was published in 2008. The Code describes the professional standards of practice and behaviour for nurses and midwives. Four themes describe what nurses and midwives are expected to do: prioritise people practise effectively preserve safety, and promote professionalism and trust. The

Ian Duncan-Smith says he wants to make those on benefits 'better people'!

By any account, the government's austerity strategy is utilitarian. It justifies its approach by the presumed potential ends. It's objective is to cut the deficit, but it has also adopted another objective which is specifically targeted. It seeks to drive people off benefits and 'back to work'.  The two together are toxic to the poorest in society. Those least able to cope are the most affected by the cuts in benefits and the loss of services. It is the coupling of these two strategic aims that make their policies ethically questionable. For, by combining the two, slashing the value of benefits to make budget savings while also changing the benefits system, the highest burden falls on a specific group, those dependent on benefits. For the greater good of the majority, a minority group, those on benefits, are being sacrificed; sacrificed on the altar of austerity. And they are being sacrificed in part so that others may be spared. Utilitarian ethics considers the ba

When Finance Drives Destruction

Tackling climate change means stopping the funding of rainforest destruction, says a significant study commissioned by the World Wildlife Fund.  The UK's financial services have provided directly over £8.7 billion to 167 different traders, processors, and buyers of forest-risk commodities (cocoa, rubber, timber, soy, beef, palm oil, pulp & paper) from 2013 to 2021.   With direct and indirect investment,  the figure rises to a staggering £200 bn.  Whilst not all that investment is in destructive projects,  the study concludes there is little transparency on the risk.  Finance is the oil in the economic machine.  But it also drives decisions. We all know the importance of money. We borrow to invest. So much depends on it, such as company pensions.  Do we really know what our pension pots are doing? We invest for the future. But what kind of future? Is all investment good?  Much investment is bad. Investment drives the nature of our economy. It drives our decisions as individuals,