The rich benefit most, let them pay more tax | Letters

We must consider the money we need and how to care for our fellow citizens, says retired GP Peter Estcourt

Oh dear. Another article on how to save the NHS (How to save the NHS, according to those in the know, 6 January) that conveniently avoids the basic issues, which are money and how to care for our fellow citizens. Alan Milburn and Jack O’Sullivan (please no charge for seeing a GP) rely on technology. Obviously this has a place, especially in improving patient-centred care, but don’t forget most NHS patients are elderly, frail, may have memory problems, and are not big users of technology. Shirley Cramer advocates greater public health investment which does indeed have many benefits and is relatively cheap, but in essence only moves the goalposts. Ultimately a lot of us will get old and frail and need expensive care and better public health may only increase the numbers!

The divide between medical and social care is very vague. Medical care is available 24 hours a day seven days a week and is free; social care is largely only available 9 to 5, Monday to Friday and is means tested. Breaking up the system through outsourcing and privatisation only complicates matters. Basically both need to be provided by government and be taxpayer-funded. Expensive? Why not have a levy of 5% on all inheritance over £100,000, including trusts. The rich who would benefit most in life would pay more in the end.

Continue reading... January 09, 2018 at 12:40AM