What is all the fuss about?

I can't see what the fuss is about.  As long as the NHS remains 'free' to everyone (free in sense of that the public are happy to pay their taxes towards the NHS and get a free service in return), regardless of income, why does it matter if the organisation that runs the hospital is public or private?  In the case of Hinchinbrooke Hospital, we should be thankful that Circle, a part-private/part-co-operative partnership is willing to take on a hospital that is deep in debt and has faced significant problems.  It was for that reason, that even the last Labour Government, were responsible for initially bringing in the private contract for Hinchinbrooke in order to bring some private sector disciplines to a public sector organisation that had notably failed.

Part of the animus against private sector management is the argument is that there should be no 'profits' made out of the NHS.  But it is a ludicrous one.  NHS Hospitals are built by private contractors (the last Government also signed up to complex private finance initiative contracts), NHS Hospitals offer a number of private sector services (eg Internet and cafes) and NHS Patients are often sent to private hospitals for treatment under NHS auspices.

Of course there are cases where the private sector has failed - but there are also cases where the public sector fails as well.  We shouldn't be so dogmatic and rule out one method of management against the other.  After all, whilst food is a necessity, no one ever argues that the state should control supermarkets.

You can read more HERE.

by Robert Halfon - www.roberthalfon.blogspot.com