But this effectively claims that just two beds are suffiLondon Health cient to serve the emergency Emergency needs of a population in excess of 12 million in the South Fast of England. in other THE NEWS that rail privawords the biggest city in tisation has already cost the Europe nas been. reduced to government £1 billion came the level that its hospitals in the same week as the publicould not cope with a serious cation of a report on the tragic car crash, let alone any larger death of the Bexley man who disaster. had to be flown to Leeds for a This is no accident. Under neurosurgery bed after a road the Tories the NHS has been accident.
starved of cash and resources, As campaigners had with a rapid reduction both in warned, the report was a the acute beds that handle whitewash, aimed at blaming emergencies and in long-stay an individual consultant for beds for the elderly and the the appalling shortage of acute mentally ill. and specialist hospital beds in The remaining psychiatric the capital.
beds are under enormous Indeed the report's argupressure, while mental health ment is that there were, in fact, community care schemes are two Intensive Care Unit beds hopelessly under resourced. available, at the Royal Free Almost all long-term care of Hospital.
the frail elderly has now been privatised, with thousands consigned to profit-making nursing homes and forced to pay for the privilege through means- tested charges.
And acute beds are now under increasing stress, as a sudden upsurge in emergency admissions, itself apparently a product of the market system and GP fund-holding, swamps hospitals across the country.
The fl billion for the rail sell-off shows that there is cash to spare for projects the Tories think are important, while the NHS grinds into crisis.
A key difference in a socialist policy is to put healthcare near the top of the agenda for action rather than regard health spending as an obstacle to greater tax cuts.
A second difference is that socialists reject the argument that demand for health care is 'infinite'. This always leads on to the obvious conclusion: imposing arbitrary limits on health spending, limits which reflect political priorities rather than the need for care.
A third difference is that socialists recognise the need for genuine collective provision of health care, rejecting charges for medicines or treatment. Health promotion Fourthly, instead of the Tory attempt to close hospitals by imposing utopian 'health promotion' schemes which have little impact on the most deprived and unhealthy sections of society, socialists recognise the need for broader social policies to improve health.
And fifth, instead of the Tory obsession with controlling health services through secretive quangos staffed by servile co- thinkers, socialists press for increased community involvement and control, with the scrapping of the market system with its Trusts, fund-holders and 'purchasing authorities', to be replaced by elected local health boards including health workers.
A completely new approach to health and health care is required.
While Major's Britain leaves millions eking out an existence in poor housing, on low incomes and pitiful benefits, a socialist health policy would combine with policies for housing, for job creation, a minimum wage, and improved education. It was this combination in the post-war "boom' years, rather than the establishment of the NHS, which helped increase life expectancy and eliminate the diseases of poverty.
In 1980 the Black Report made a series of recommendations for elementary health promotion, including free school milk and meals. The full package was costed then at no more than f3 billion a year: but the Report was ignored by the Tories. Had it