How terribly amusing

Cancer screening \’risks being a casualty of NHS reform’
Councils given public health funds by Lansley will spend it on potholes instead, experts warn .

The argument being that when national politicians decide how money is allocated and spent they get it right but local politicians will inevitably mess it up.

So much for democracy and localism, eh?

10 thoughts on “How terribly amusing”

  1. Except that us local councils won’t be trusted – the public health funding transferring to us will be “ringfenced” to a defined set of activities.

    Of course road safety isn’t a public health issue now is it?

  2. But I thought all public officials were omniscient saints who could foresee all problems and plan for them and solve them far better than any ‘markets’ could? How could such paragons make any errors? Are not all resource allocations by the State not perfect by definition?

  3. Services under threat include …. tobacco control and smoking cessation

    Excellent. Once these are held up to local inspection more people will understand the bullshit that we are being fed.

    “You can have your pot hole fixed and your granny can have her meals on wheels, but we’ll have to stop supporting smoking cessation officers and five-a-day coordinators” is going to be a very short discussion.

  4. ‘The Road Fund is a ring fenced tax for the maintenance of the National road system’. Debate.

  5. It’s not the 990 given the all clear, it’s the 8 false positives in the other 10 and the 2 false negatives in the 990 which makes breast cancer screening a crapshoot. Quite a few feminists are coming round to this view.
    Interestingly the reliability of prostate cancer screening is pretty much the same, but men just don’t take up the offer of screening.

    I won’t speculate on this disparity. (Clearly it’s got nothing to do with men understanding statistics, nearly all of them don’t.)

    But I do agree: fixing potholes and keeping libraries open should take priority.

  6. “Councils given public health funds by Lansley will spend it on potholes instead”

    This is almost certainly true. Many councils – and I will guarantee that my own will be one – will contiue to piss our money away like drunken sailors, while reducing spending in the most inappropriate place they can, and blame “the cuts” for grannies dying in the streets.

  7. The health money is ringfenced. Though it’s a flexible fence, using to fix poltholes won;t wash with the DoH.

    That’s not to say that it won’t be applied to current health spending by councils (especially in areas of social care) which will then release existing revenue funds for other areas, such as potholes, libraries, freezing council tax (since the government isn’t actually funding the latter for 2012/13, whatever big Eric says).

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *