Call to take politics out NHS

POLITICS should be removed from the running of the NHS in Scotland, according to the president of a well-respected medical college.

Professor Frank Dunn, president of the Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Glasgow, has expressed concern that changes to the health service are stalled whenever parliamentary elections approach.

Patients, the public and staff are also confused as different political parties publicise contradictory information about how well the NHS is performing, he says in an article published in The Herald. He calls on Scotland to lead the way by adopting a new approach where the NHS is run by an executive body including members of different political parties.

Health Secretary Shona Robison said: “This is an interesting contribution to the debate on the future of the health service, and of course I am always happy to work with key stakeholders to hear their views.”

THE intervention of Professor Frank Dunn, president of the Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Glasgow, in calling for politics to be removed from the running of the NHS in Scotland, is an important contribution to an important debate.

There are few things more political than the NHS as numerous politicians have found to their cost. Some doctors resisted its creation in the first place and, although it would appear that the bulk of senior medical practitioners are today committed to its principles, this is by no means universal.

We may disagree with the thrust of Conservative reforms to turn the NHS into a market place, or regret the disastrous recourse to PFI as a funding model for our hospitals, but these were legitimate political decisions. It is called democracy.

Professor Dunn is absolutely spot-on when he laments IMBYism, the demand for every service to by provided “in my back yard”. He is also correct when he states: “Politicians are very much aware that any suggestion that their local hospital might lose acute services can result in the loss of votes.

“Other plans — even when they are well thought through and have professional support — will be mothballed if there is any electoral risk. Therefore in every four to five-year cycle there is a planning blight for a period of time in the run-up to elections. This is a feature of all governing parties irrespective of their political allegiance.”

That is all true, but it is an argument for more mature politics, not for the removal of democracy from such important areas of public life. It may be there is a prize to be won for politicians who can persuade electors of reasoned arguments.

This newspaper will assuredly support such tribunes.

Professor Dunn’s big idea is “a health committee comprising representatives of the political parties and health advisers and chaired by the health secretary” as the executive decisionmaking body of the Scottish NHS.

But in our respectful view, there is simply no place in our current polity for such an odd hybrid. Our system is clear, with a division between the executive and the legislature. Health Secretary Shona Robison already presides over an executive decision-making body which includes experts and health advisers.

But the place for opposition parties to make their case is at the health committee at Holyrood and that should remain the case.

There is a problem, however. We now have one party unexpectedly in control of all the instruments of power at Holyrood. A peak which Labour, as the institution’s creator, could not achieve has now been scaled by the SNP and there is every indication that next May the party could tighten its grip on the devolved Parliament.

But this is democracy. Our best hope is that the more powerful the SNP gets, the more genuine dissent will be fomented and even tolerated. If the SNP is to be all powerful because of the overwhelming support of the electorate, we must hope that some within its ranks will voice dissent.

The NHS needs protecting, but not unthinking support. If there are new ways of doing things we need such fresh thinking to be put forward and examined.

Nicola Sturgeon was a good health secretary and is an impressive First Minister. She needs to encourage in her friend and successor, Ms Robison, an openness to new thinking and, if need be, a tolerance of dissent.